ArticlePloS one2026
Proposing the use of a physiotherapist navigator in an acute cancer care setting in Ontario: A nationwide survey using a modified Delphi approach.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo engage health care providers in Canada to identify the roles, tasks, processes, assessments, and triaging decisions for a Physiotherapist (PT) Navigator role that will be implemented and evaluated in a future trial.
methodsA two-round, online, modified reactive Delphi study was used. Any licensed health care practitioner in Canada who works with individuals with or beyond cancer was eligible to participate. Round 1 identified qualitative feedback on role domains to guide role improvement. Qualitative feedback was examined in duplicate using content analysis. Round 2 identified quantitative feedback to gather numerical data to establish consensus. Quantitative survey feedback was analysed using descriptive statistics including mean and standard deviation. Items were added to the role description if identified by ≥10% of respondents, and 75% was the threshold to define consensus. Lastly, a consensus meeting including end users was held to consider priority items and utility of role translation into clinical practice.
resultsConsensus on the PT Navigator role description was achieved following the two survey rounds (Round One; n = 34, Round Two; n = 18). Four domains were identified to define the role: process, assessment, triaging decisions, and duties and responsibilities. A figure visualizing the PT Navigator role was generated. Changes to the role after survey feedback included increasing appointment times with the PT Navigator, longer duration between follow-ups, patient self-referral, and additional objective testing. Consensus meeting feedback considered the variability in follow-up depending on different treatment timelines and an emphasis on promoting self-management strategies. Perceived usefulness of the role was high (mean 9.19/10; SD 2.12).
conclusionsThis modified Delphi study identified key domains that would inform development of a comprehensive PT Navigator role working with cancer patients. The role offers a novel approach to promote routine assessment and early intervention, with the aim towards integrating PTs meaningfully within cancer care settings in Canada.
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.