Institutional capacity to provide psychosocial care in cancer programs: Addressing barriers to delivering quality cancer care
Open accessAbstract
Objective: This study investigates barriers and promoters to delivering quality psychosocial services in 58 cancer programs across North America. Methods: Oncology care providers (n = 2008) participated in a survey in which they identified barriers and promoters for delivering psychosocial care at their respective institutions. Multilevel modeling was used to examine (a) the extent to which provider and institutional characteristics were associated with the most common barriers, and (b) associations between perceived barriers and institutional capacity to deliver psychosocial services as measured by the Cancer Psychosocial Care Matrix. Results: Across 58 Commission on Cancer‐accredited programs in North America, the most frequently reported barriers were inadequate number of psychosocial care personnel, lack of funding, inadequate amount of time, lack of systematic procedures, and inadequate training for oncology providers. Overall, there were few significant differences in reported barriers by type of institution or type of provider. In general, the most frequently reported barriers were significantly associated with the institution's capacity to deliver quality psychosocial care. In particular, the lack of a systematic process for psychosocial care delivery significantly predicted lower levels of institutional capacity to deliver quality psychosocial care. Conclusions: When identifying barriers, respondents reported a greater number of institutional barriers than barriers related to individual provider or patient characteristics. These results present a compelling case for cancer programs to implement and monitor systematic procedures for psychosocial care and to integrate these procedures in routine clinical practice.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Access to in-person supportive care is often limited by clinician shortages, financial constraints, and time available to attend therapy sessions.
“Access to in-person supportive care is often limited by clinician shortages, financial constraints, and time available to attend therapy sessions [9-13].”
From Co-Designing the MOSAIC mHealth App With Breast Cancer Survivors: User-Centered Design Approach (2024) · cites this paper as [12]
The Discussion (section 4; page unavailable) identifies inadequate psychosocial personnel and lack of funding as institutional barriers. Section 3.3.3 also reports inadequate time as a provider-reported barrier. The paper does not establish that patients’ financial constraints or time available to attend therapy sessions limit their access to in-person care. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPsychosocial support is limited by resource constraints.
“Psychosocial support is limited by resource constraints. 126”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers
Saldaña, J. (2025) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781036235611 · Cited by 19,156 · see citing works
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods.
Longford, N. T., Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2075823 · Cited by 18,768 · see citing works
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods
Davidian, M. (2003) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2003.s288 · Cited by 13,820 · see citing works
Hierarchical linear models applications and data analysis methods
Raudenbush, S. 1., & Bryk, A. S. (2002) · Cited by 1,594 · see citing works
Distress Management, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Riba, M. B., Donovan, K. A., Andersen, B., Braun, I., Breitbart, W. S., Brewer, B. W., Buchmann, L. O., Clark, M. M., Collins, M., Corbett, C., et al. (2019) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2019.0048 · Cited by 871 · see citing works
Cancer Care for the Whole Patient
Institute of Medicine (2008) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/11993 · Cited by 715 · see citing works
Dilworth, S., Higgins, I., Parker, V., Kelly, B., & Turner, J. (2014) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3474 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Ehlers, S. L., Davis, K., Bluethmann, S. M., Quintiliani, L. M., Kendall, J., Ratwani, R. M., Diefenbach, M. A., & Graves, K. D. (2019) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/iby123 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
The Five Steps of Comprehensive Psychosocial Distress Screening
Lazenby, M., Tan, H. C., Pasacreta, N., Ercolano, E. A., & McCorkle, R. C. (2015) · Current Oncology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11912-015-0447-z · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Zebrack, B., Kayser, K., Padgett, L., Sundstrom, L., Jobin, C., Nelson, K., & Fineberg, I. C. (2016) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.30016 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Self-citationKnies, A. K., Jutagir, D. R., Ercolano, E. A., Pasacreta, N., Lazenby, M., & McCorkle, R. C. (2018) · Palliative & Supportive Care · doi:10.1017/s1478951518000378 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Zwahlen, D., Tondorf, T., Rothschild, S. I., Koller, M. T., Rochlitz, C. F., & Kiss, A. (2017) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3362-x · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Jacobsen, P. B., & Norton, W. E. (2019) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibz022 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Gosselin, T., Crane‐Okada, R., Irwin, M. M., Tringali, C., & Wenzel, J. A. (2011) · Oncology nursing forum · doi:10.1188/11.onf.729-737 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Managing Psychosocial Distress: Lessons Learned in Optimizing Screening Program Implementation.
Ercolano, E. A., Hoffman, E., Tan, H. C., Pasacreta, N., Lazenby, M., & McCorkle, R. C. (2018) · PubMed · Cited by 23 · see citing works
The Association of Oncology Social Work's Project to Assure Quality Cancer Care (APAQCC)
Zebrack, B., Kayser, K., Oktay, J. S., Sundstrom, L., & Sachs, A. M. (2017) · Journal of Psychosocial Oncology · doi:10.1080/07347332.2017.1397832 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Self-citationDiffusion of a Distress Management Guideline into practice
Tavernier, S. S., Beck, S. L., & Dudley, W. N. (2013) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3295 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Ristevski, E., Breen, S. J., & Regan, M. (2011) · Oncology nursing forum · doi:10.1188/11.onf.e204-e211 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Forsythe, L. P., Rowland, J., Padgett, L., Blaseg, K., Siegel, S. D., Dingman, C. M., & Gillis, T. (2013) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3254 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Screening for Psychosocial Distress: A National Survey of Oncology Social Workers
Brintzenhofeszoc, K. M., Davis, C., Kayser, K., et al. (2014) · Journal of Psychosocial Oncology · doi:10.1080/07347332.2014.977416 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationPromoting the Implementation of Best-Practice Guidelines Using a Matrix Tool
Luxford, K., Hill, D., & Bell, R. (2006) · Disease Management & Health Outcomes · doi:10.2165/00115677-200614020-00003 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Co-Designing the MOSAIC mHealth App With Breast Cancer Survivors: User-Centered Design Approach
Nuseibeh, B. Z., Johns, S. A., Shih, P. C., Lewis, G. F., Gowan, T. M., & Jordan, E. J. (2024) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/59426 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Schiess, L. C., Song, L. L., Schädelin, S., Fürst, T., Urech, C., Friese, C. R., & Katapodi, M. C. (2026) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.70076
“126 A realistic approach regarding the resources required for NPI implementation would facilitate scaling up in routine practice.”
- Authors
- Kayser, K., Brydon, D. M., Moon, H., & Zebrack, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Louisville (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kayser, Karen
- Venue
- Psycho-Oncology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-08-13
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1995-2002
- ISSN
- 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1611
- OpenAlex
- W3044034257
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 0.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- University of Michigan Library
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Keywords
- psychosocial care, cancer programs, institutional capacity, barriers to care delivery, oncology providers, financial constraints, provider training, Commission on Cancer accreditation, quality of cancer care
- MeSH terms
- Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Psychosocial Support Systems, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Health Workforce, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Medical Oncology, Mental Health Services, Neoplasms, North America, Quality of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Work, Workload, Capacity Building
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
