CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 132Cancer survivorship and careMedication Adherence and ComplianceWomen's cancer prevention and management

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cancer treatment adherence among low‐income women with breast or gynecologic cancer: A randomized controlled trial of patient navigation

Open access
Ell, Kathleen, Vourlekis, Betsy, Xie, Bin, Nedjat‐Haiem, Frances R., Lee, Pey‐Jiuan, Muderspach, Laila, Russell, Christy, Palinkas, Lawrence A.·2009·Cancer
DOI 10.1002/cncr.24500PMC PMC2749894
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors implemented a controlled, randomized trial that compared 2 interventions: the provision of written resource navigation information (enhanced usual care [EUC]) versus written information plus patient navigation (TPN) aimed at improving adjuvant treatment adherence and follow‐up among 487 low‐income, predominantly Hispanic women with breast cancer or gynecologic cancer. METHODS: Women were randomized to receive either TPN or EUC; and chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormone therapy, and follow‐up were assessed over 12 months. Patients with breast cancer were analyzed separately from patients with gynecologic cancer. RESULTS: Overall adherence rates ranged from 87% to 94%, and there were no significant differences between the TPN group and the EUC group. Among women with breast cancer, 90% of the EUC group and 88% of the TPN group completed chemotherapy (14% of the EUC group and 26% of the TPN group delayed the completion of chemotherapy), 2% of the EUC group and 4% of the TPN group failed to complete chemotherapy, and 8% of the EUC group and 7% of the TPN group refused chemotherapy. Radiation treatment adherence was similar between the groups: Ninety percent of patients completed radiation (40% of the EUC group and 42% of the TPN group delayed the completion of radiation); in both groups, 2% failed to complete radiation, and 8% refused radiation. Among gynecologic patients, 87% of the EUC group and 94% of the TPN group completed chemotherapy (41% of the EUC group and 31% of the TPN group completed it with delays), 7% of the EUC group and 6% of the TPN group failed to complete chemotherapy, 6% of the EUC refused chemotherapy, 87% of the EUC group and 84% of the TPN group completed radiation (51% of the EUC group and 42% of the TPN with delays), 5% of the EUC group and 8% of the TPN group failed to complete radiation, and 8% of the EUC group and 5% of the TPN group refused radiation. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment adherence across randomized groups was notably higher than reported in previous studies, suggesting that active telephone patient navigation or written resource informational materials may facilitate adherence among low‐income, predominantly Hispanic women. Adherence also may have be facilitated by federal‐state breast and cervical cancer treatment funding. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.24500

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Mor V, 1984, The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale. An examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting, J Clin Oncol., 2, 1170
  2. Glaser BG, 1967, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 132

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ell, K., Vourlekis, B., Xie, B., Nedjat‐Haiem, F. R., Lee, P., Muderspach, L., Russell, C., & Palinkas, L. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
ORCID
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-06-23
Volume
115
Issue
19
Pages
4606-4615
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
DOI
10.1002/cncr.24500
PMC
PMC2749894
OpenAlex
W2047684438
Cited by
132
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01 CA94827, R01CA094827)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
patient navigation, low-income women, Hispanic women, breast cancer, gynecologic cancer, adjuvant therapy, chemotherapy completion, follow-up care
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Patient Education as Topic, Poverty, Quality of Life, Survival Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review