SynthesisJournal of primary care & community health
Cancer Nutrition Education for Black Women: Policy Responsibility in a Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction/ObjectivesCancer nutrition education supports cancer prevention and survivorship, yet African American/Black (AA/B) women continue to experience nutrition-related inequities across the cancer continuum. This review examined how qualitative studies describe these inequities and assign responsibility within the literature.MethodsPubMed and Scopus were searched in December 2024 and updated in January 2026. Eligible studies involved AA/B women in the United States, addressed cancer-related nutrition experiences, used qualitative methods, and examined nutrition-related inequities across the cancer care continuum. SPIDER-informed criteria guided eligibility, data were synthesized using inductive thematic analysis guided by intersectionality, and study quality was appraised using CASP.ResultsFourteen qualitative studies were included. Responsibility for nutrition-related inequities was located within programmatic, institutional, and structural conditions. Five themes were identified: Universal Nutrition Standards, Feasible Nutrition Guidance, Access and Choices, Concordance and Cultural Relevance, and Community-Driven Co-Design. Participants described adapting nutrition guidance to caregiving demands, cultural food practices, survivorship challenges, and access barriers. Race, gender, caregiving, cultural identity, geography, and socioeconomic conditions were reported across studies.ConclusionsThe literature frames inequities in cancer nutrition education as consequences of programmatic, institutional, and structural conditions. Improving cancer nutrition equity for AA/B women may require culturally relevant, feasible, community-informed approaches and stronger attention to nutrition delivery contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.