Systematic Review of the Impact of Cancer Survivorship Care Plans on Health Outcomes and Health Care Delivery
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: Numerous organizations recommend that patients with cancer receive a survivorship care plan (SCP) comprising a treatment summary and follow-up care plans. Among current barriers to implementation are providers’ concerns about the strength of evidence that SCPs improve outcomes. This systematic review evaluates whether delivery of SCPs has a positive impact on health outcomes and health care delivery for cancer survivors. Methods: Randomized and nonrandomized studies evaluating patient-reported outcomes, health care use, and disease outcomes after delivery of SCPs were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Library. Data extracted by independent raters were summarized on the basis of qualitative synthesis. Results: Eleven nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies met inclusion criteria. Variability was evident across studies in cancer types, SCP delivery timing and method, SCP recipients and content, SCP-related counseling, and outcomes assessed. Nonrandomized study findings yielded descriptive information on satisfaction with care and reactions to SCPs. Randomized study findings were generally negative for the most commonly assessed outcomes (ie, physical, functional, and psychological well-being); findings were positive in single studies for other outcomes, including amount of information received, satisfaction with care, and physician implementation of recommended care. Conclusion: Existing research provides little evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes and health care delivery. Possible explanations include heterogeneity in study designs and the low likelihood that SCP delivery alone would influence distal outcomes. Findings are limited but more positive for proximal outcomes (eg, information received) and for care delivery, particularly when SCPs are accompanied by counseling to prepare survivors for future clinical encounters. Recommendations for future research include focusing to a greater extent on evaluating ways to ensure SCP recommendations are subsequently acted on as part of ongoing care.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This systematic review of 24 studies found limited evidence that survivorship care plans (SCPs) improve health outcomes or health care delivery for cancer survivors. Findings were generally null for commonly assessed patient-reported outcomes, with isolated positive findings for proximal outcomes and care delivery, especially when SCPs were accompanied by counseling.
Key findings
- The review included 24 articles: 11 nonrandomized studies and 13 randomized studies. Nonrandomized studies were mostly descriptive and focused on feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction; one analysis of changes in psychological distress found no statistically significant differences.
- Among randomized studies, findings were generally negative for the most commonly assessed outcomes (physical, functional, and psychological well-being). Seven studies reported no statistically significant differences across intervention conditions; four reported beneficial effects limited to single studies (fewer depressive symptoms, less health worry and less negative outlook, greater satisfaction with care, greater amount of information received), and one reported adverse effects (more symptoms, illness concerns, and emotional impact of illness).
- Six randomized studies assessed health care delivery and use; five reported beneficial effects (greater preference for shared care, greater likelihood of correctly identifying the PCP as responsible for follow-up, greater adherence to cardiomyopathy screening, better physician implementation of survivorship care recommendations, and more cancer-related contact with the PCP), while one reported no statistically significant differences.
- Two studies assessed disease-related end points and found no statistically significant differences in time to diagnosis of recurrence or recurrence-related serious clinical events. Economic findings were mixed: one study reported lower health care costs in the SCP condition, while another reported higher societal and health care costs but negligible differences in quality-adjusted life years.
Methods
- Systematic literature searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library, with coverage ending July 16, 2017. Studies were eligible if published in English, involved delivery of an SCP to survivors and/or their health care providers, and evaluated patient-reported outcomes, health care use, or disease outcomes.
- A total of 1,399 studies were identified through database searches and 54 additional articles from reference lists and previous reviews; after duplicates were removed, 1,091 articles were screened, 41 full texts were assessed, and 24 articles met inclusion criteria.
- Two paired reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and rated quality using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies for nonrandomized studies and items adapted from the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized studies. Because of limited size and marked heterogeneity, analysis focused on qualitative synthesis rather than meta-analysis.
Limitations
- The paper states that the limited number of studies and heterogeneous methodology precluded quantitative synthesis, so the review examined whether randomized study findings reached statistical significance rather than aggregating effect sizes. It was also limited to published studies in English, excluding relevant unpublished studies and research in other languages, and examined only health outcomes and health care delivery, not other aspects such as survivor and provider preferences for SCP content and delivery methods.
- Evident from the text: the nonrandomized studies were uncontrolled and focused mostly on feasibility and acceptability, limiting conclusions about impact. Many randomized studies had unclear risk-of-bias ratings because of insufficient information, and significant findings for any specific outcome were often limited to single studies, which the authors note seriously limits definitive conclusions.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 14 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data§ Results
Variability was evident across the included studies in cancer types, SCP delivery timing and method, SCP recipients and content, SCP-related counseling, and outcomes assessed.
“Variability was evident across studies in cancer types, SCP delivery timing and method, SCP recipients and content, SCP-related counseling, and outcomes assessed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given§ DISCUSSION
Among the 13 randomized studies, most focused on examining the impact of SCPs on patient-reported health states and perceptions of care.
“Among the 13 randomized studies, most focused on examining the impact of SCPs on patient-reported health states and perceptions of care.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation§ RESULTS
No statistically significant differences across intervention conditions were reported in seven randomized studies.
“No statistically significant differences across intervention conditions were reported in seven studies.23,24,26-28,33,35”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Five of the six studies reporting results for the impact of SCPs on health care delivery and use reported significant findings.
“Only six studies reported results for the impact of SCPs on health care delivery and use; however, five of these studies reported significant findings.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation§ RESULTS
The one exception to descriptive reporting in the nonrandomized studies was an analysis of changes over time in psychological distress scores, which yielded no statistically significant differences.
“The one exception was an analysis of changes over time in psychological distress scores, which yielded no statistically significant differences.19”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
There was little consistency across the reviewed studies in what outcomes were assessed and in what measures were used to assess the same outcome (eg, psychological distress).
“There was also little consistency in what outcomes were assessed and even in what measures were used to assess the same outcome (eg, psychological distress).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
All significant findings on health care delivery and use suggested beneficial effects of SCPs.
“All the significant findings suggested beneficial effects of SCPs, but, once again, the findings for any specific outcome (eg, physician implementation of survivorship care recommendations) were limited to single studies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given§ DISCUSSION
The studies reviewed evaluated SCPs that differed markedly in terms of the follow-up information and care recommendations provided, when they were delivered in relation to treatment completion, and how and to whom they were delivered.
“The studies reviewed evaluated SCPs that differed markedly in terms of the follow-up information and care recommendations provided, when they were delivered in relation to treatment completion, and how and to whom they were delivered.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation§ DISCUSSION
Delivery of SCPs resulted in survivors reporting a greater amount of information received.
“Consistent with this view are results described in the current article showing delivery of SCPs resulted in survivors reporting a greater amount of information received34 and greater likelihood of survivors correctly identifying their PCP as responsible for follow-up care.23”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [34] source
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Findings for any specific health care delivery and use outcome were limited to single studies.
“All the significant findings suggested beneficial effects of SCPs, but, once again, the findings for any specific outcome (eg, physician implementation of survivorship care recommendations) were limited to single studies.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation§ RESULTS
In one randomized study, health care costs were reported to be lower in the SCP condition relative to the no-SCP condition.
“In one study, health care costs were reported to be lower in the SCP condition relative to the no-SCP condition.26”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
High risk of bias ratings was uncommon except for incomplete outcome data being adequately assessed.
“High risk of bias ratings was uncommon except for incomplete outcome data being adequately assessed.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation§ DISCUSSION
Delivery of SCPs resulted in a greater likelihood of survivors correctly identifying their PCP as responsible for follow-up care.
“Consistent with this view are results described in the current article showing delivery of SCPs resulted in survivors reporting a greater amount of information received34 and greater likelihood of survivors correctly identifying their PCP as responsible for follow-up care.23”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [23] source
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingreasoning§ RESULTS
Most nonrandomized studies were rated weak for selection bias, study design, and data collection methods.
“most nonrandomized studies were rated weak for selection bias, study design, and data collection methods.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation§ DISCUSSION
In one reviewed study, using the delivery of an SCP as an opportunity to coach survivors in how to raise concerns about survivorship issues at subsequent visits with providers resulted in greater physician implementation of SCP recommendations.
“This strategy was used in one of the studies reviewed and resulted in greater physician implementation of SCP recommendations.33”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [33] source
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data§ Results
Findings were positive in single studies for other outcomes, including amount of information received, satisfaction with care, and physician implementation of recommended care.
“findings were positive in single studies for other outcomes, including amount of information received, satisfaction with care, and physician implementation of recommended care.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Significant beneficial effects of SCPs on depressive symptoms, health worry, outlook on life, amount of information received, and satisfaction with care were limited to single studies.
“Among the few significant findings, results suggesting beneficial effects on depressive symptoms, health worry, outlook on life, amount of information received, and satisfaction with care were limited to single studies.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Significant adverse effects of SCPs on symptom reporting, illness concerns, and emotional impact of illness were limited to a single study.
“Similarly, results suggesting adverse effects on symptom reporting, illness concerns, and emotional impact of illness were limited to a single study.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Only six studies reported results for the impact of SCPs on health care delivery and use.
“Only six studies reported results for the impact of SCPs on health care delivery and use; however, five of these studies reported significant findings.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingreasoning§ RESULTS
Among six randomized studies assessing health care delivery and use, five reported findings suggesting beneficial effects of providing SCPs.
“Five studies reported findings suggesting beneficial effects of providing SCPs”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given§ DISCUSSION
Studies examining disease end points and economic outcomes are too few to draw even tentative conclusions.
“Studies examining disease end points and economic outcomes are too few to draw even tentative conclusions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
Three randomized studies were notable for a relatively high number of items rated as having a low risk of bias, indicative of more rigorous methodology.
“Three studies were notable for a relatively high number of items rated as having a low risk of bias (ie, indicative of more rigorous methodology).27,30,31”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Results
Nonrandomized study findings yielded descriptive information on satisfaction with care and reactions to SCPs.
“Nonrandomized study findings yielded descriptive information on satisfaction with care and reactions to SCPs.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
Four randomized studies reported findings suggesting beneficial effects of providing SCPs.
“Four studies reported findings suggesting beneficial effects of providing SCPs”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation§ RESULTS
One randomized study reported findings suggesting adverse effects of providing SCPs.
“One study reported findings suggesting adverse effects of providing SCPs”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The 13 randomized studies generally yielded statistically nonsignificant findings.
“These studies generally yielded statistically nonsignificant findings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
Unclear ratings due to insufficient information were common for three aspects of risk: adequate concealment of allocation, adequate prevention of knowledge of allocated intervention by outcome assessors, and adequate protection against contamination.
“Unclear ratings due to insufficient information were common for three aspects of risk: adequate concealment of allocation, adequate prevention of knowledge of allocated intervention by outcome assessors, and adequate protection against contamination.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Results
Randomized study findings were generally negative for the most commonly assessed outcomes (physical, functional, and psychological well-being).
“Randomized study findings were generally negative for the most commonly assessed outcomes (ie, physical, functional, and psychological well-being)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSION
This systematic review found limited evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes or health care delivery.
“In conclusion, this systematic review found limited evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes or health care delivery.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductreasoning§ RESULTS
Given the limited size and marked heterogeneity of the evidence base, the analysis focused on qualitative synthesis rather than quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis).
“Given the limited size and marked heterogeneity of the evidence base, analysis focused on qualitative synthesis rather than quantitative synthesis (ie, meta-analysis) of identified literature.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSION
Few conclusions can be drawn about the impact of SCPs from the 11 nonrandomized studies that were reviewed.
“Few conclusions can be drawn about impact of SCPs from the 11 nonrandomized studies that were reviewed, because they were uncontrolled and focused mostly on issues of the feasibility and acceptability of delivering SCPs.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSION
The general lack of convergent significant findings across studies seriously limits the extent to which definitive conclusions can be drawn about the impact of SCPs for patient-reported health status, perceptions of care, health care delivery, and health care use.
“The general lack of convergent significant findings across studies seriously limits the extent to which definitive conclusions can be drawn about the impact of SCPs for patient-reported health status, perceptions of care, health care delivery, and health care use.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSION
Results of this review suggest that delivery of SCPs alone is not likely to influence long-term health outcomes.
“With regard to distal outcomes, results of this review suggest that delivery of SCPs alone is not likely to influence long-term health outcomes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Conclusion
Existing research provides little evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes and health care delivery.
“Existing research provides little evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes and health care delivery.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The outcomes assessed in the included studies adequately capture the benefits SCPs are intended to produce, so that null findings reflect a true absence of effect rather than unmeasured or unassessed benefits.
- Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
There is a lack of research addressing the adoption of survivorship care models within community-based primary care practices.
“More broadly, there is a compelling need to address the identified lack of research addressing the adoption of survivorship care models within community-based primary care practices.47”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [47] source
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
Evidence bearing on the optimal timing for transitioning some or all aspects of follow-up care to PCPs is lacking.
“Although there is a growing consensus that survivorship care should be shared between oncology specialists and PCPs for many survivors,43 evidence bearing on the optimal timing for transitioning some or all aspects of follow-up care to PCPs is lacking.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [43] source
Not checked in the free run.
- Study design and conductown data§ DISCUSSION
Characteristics of the evidence base (eg, limited number of studies and heterogeneous methodology) precluded conducting a quantitative synthesis of existing research.
“These include characteristics of the evidence base (eg, limited number of studies and heterogeneous methodology) that precluded conducting a quantitative synthesis of existing research.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductreasoning§ DISCUSSION
The review was limited to examining whether findings from randomized studies reached statistical significance rather than calculating and aggregating effect sizes irrespective of prespecified significance levels.
“Consequently, we were limited to examining whether findings from randomized studies reached statistical significance rather than being able to calculate and aggregate effect sizes irrespective of prespecified significance levels.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
There has been little research to date evaluating the relative strengths and weaknesses of numerous survivorship care models.
“Numerous survivorship care models exist44; however, there has been little research to date evaluating their relative strengths and weaknesses.42,43,45”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked - Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
An SCP is unlikely to be effective if there are no mechanisms in place to implement the plan's recommendations.
“An SCP is unlikely to be effective if there are no mechanisms in place to implement the plan’s recommendations.41”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [41] source
Not checked in the free run.
- May combine two claims. 19
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 13
May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ ResultsEleven nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review.
“Eleven nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies met inclusion criteria.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“A total of 24 articles, comprising 11 nonrandomized studies12-22 and 13 randomized studies23-35, were eligible for inclusion in the synthesis.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data§ RESULTSSeventeen of the included studies focused on a specific cancer type.
“We found 17 studies focused on a specific cancer type”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSThe global rating of study quality was weak for nine nonrandomized studies and moderate for two nonrandomized studies.
“The global rating of study quality was weak for nine studies and moderate for two studies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingnone given§ DISCUSSIONStudies in this area have tended to focus on more distal outcomes such as survivors' reports of their health status in the months after delivery of an SCP.
“Studies in this area have tended to focus on more distal outcomes such as survivors’ reports of their health status in the months after delivery of an SCP.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingreasoning§ RESULTSSCPs were provided to primary care providers in 10 of the included studies.
“Including the last two studies, SCPs were provided to PCPs in 10 studies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingcitation§ RESULTSIn the other economic study, societal costs and health care costs were higher in the SCP condition relative to the no-SCP condition, while differences in quality-adjusted life years were negligible.
“In the other study, societal costs and health care costs were higher in the SCP condition relative to the no-SCP condition; however, differences in quality-adjusted life years were negligible.25”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSNo statistically significant differences in time to diagnosis of recurrence or in recurrence-related serious clinical events were reported when specialist follow-up care was compared with transfer of follow-up care to a primary care provider.
“No statistically significant differences in either outcome was reported when specialist follow-up care was compared with transfer of follow-up care to a PCP.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ DISCUSSIONThe 11 nonrandomized studies that were reviewed were uncontrolled and focused mostly on issues of the feasibility and acceptability of delivering SCPs.
“Few conclusions can be drawn about impact of SCPs from the 11 nonrandomized studies that were reviewed, because they were uncontrolled and focused mostly on issues of the feasibility and acceptability of delivering SCPs.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAcross randomized studies, four aspects of risk were frequently rated low: allocation adequately concealed, baseline outcome assessments similar, baseline characteristics similar, and free of selective outcome reporting.
“Across studies, four aspects of risk were frequently rated low: allocation adequately concealed, baseline outcome assessments similar, baseline characteristics similar, and free of selective outcome reporting.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingcitation§ RESULTSAmong the 13 randomized studies, the unit of randomization was the participant in 11 studies, the hospital in one study, and the oncology practice in one study.
“Among the 13 randomized studies, the unit of randomization was the participant in 11 studies,23,25-33,35 hospital in one study,34 and oncology practice in one study.24”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAmong the 13 randomized studies, sample sizes ranged from 41 to 968 (median, n = 224).
“Sample sizes ranged from 41 to 968 (median, n = 224).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAmong the 11 nonrandomized studies, sample sizes ranged from 10 to 4,021 (median, n = 142).
“sample sizes ranged from 10 to 4,021 (median, n = 142).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSFive included studies focused on survivors of childhood-onset cancers and 19 focused on survivors of adult-onset cancers.
“Five studies focused on survivors of childhood-onset cancers13,19,21,22,31 and 19 focused on survivors of adult-onset cancers.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAmong 23 studies reporting relevant information, SCPs were likely all delivered within 1 year of treatment completion in nine studies and over wider intervals or longer after treatment completion in 14 studies.
“SCPs were likely all delivered within 1 year of treatment completion in nine studies14,18,20,24,26,30,32,34,35 and otherwise in 14 studies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown data§ RESULTSAgreement on inclusion or exclusion between the two reviewers for the 41 full-text articles was substantial (90%; κ = 0.790; 95% CI, 0.594 to 0.985).
“Agreement on inclusion or exclusion between the two reviewers for the 41 articles was substantial (90%; ĸ = 0.790; 95% CI, 0.594 to 0.985).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data§ METHODSTwo paired reviewers independently extracted study data and subsequently discussed and resolved discrepancies.
“Two paired reviewers independently entered this information into a spreadsheet and subsequently discussed and resolved discrepancies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductcitation§ METHODSReviewers independently rated the quality of evidence using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies for nonrandomized studies and items adapted from the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized studies.
“Reviewers also independently rated the quality of evidence using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (QATQS)10 for nonrandomized studies and items adapted from the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials11 for randomized studies.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites [10]
Not checked in the free run.
- cites [11]
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ ConclusionFindings are limited but more positive for proximal outcomes (eg, information received) and for care delivery, particularly when SCPs are accompanied by counseling to prepare survivors for future clinical encounters.
“Findings are limited but more positive for proximal outcomes (eg, information received) and for care delivery, particularly when SCPs are accompanied by counseling to prepare survivors for future clinical encounters.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationcitation§ DISCUSSIONThis review has a broader scope than previous reviews, encompassing several forms of cancer, and includes many more studies of the impact of SCPs on health outcomes and health care delivery than previous reviews.
“It has a broader scope than previous reviews,36 encompassing several forms of cancer, and includes many more studies of the impact of SCPs on health outcomes and health care delivery than included in previous reviews.37,38”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ ConclusionPossible explanations for the limited evidence include heterogeneity in study designs and the low likelihood that SCP delivery alone would influence distal outcomes.
“Possible explanations include heterogeneity in study designs and the low likelihood that SCP delivery alone would influence distal outcomes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSIONIt is premature to conclude that SCPs are not beneficial, given weaknesses in the evidence base that include a limited number of studies, heterogeneity in the content and delivery of SCPs, and unrealistic expectations that one-time delivery of an SCP would improve patient outcomes weeks or months later.
“However, it is premature to conclude that SCPs are not beneficial, given weaknesses in the evidence base that include a limited number of studies, heterogeneity in the content and delivery of SCPs, and unrealistic expectations that one-time delivery of an SCP would improve patient outcomes weeks or months later.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data§ METHODSTwo paired reviewers independently screened study titles and abstracts and reviewed full-text articles to determine study eligibility, with discordance resolved by discussion or a third rater.
“two paired reviewers independently screened study titles and abstracts and reviewed full-text articles as needed to determine study eligibility. Discussion of discordant eligibility ratings or involvement of a third rater was used to address disagreements.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone given§ DISCUSSIONThe review examined the impact of SCPs only on health outcomes and health care delivery, and did not examine other aspects of SCPs (eg, survivor and provider preferences for SCP content and delivery methods).
“Finally, the review examined the impact of SCPs only on health outcomes and health care delivery, and did not examine other aspects of SCPs (eg, survivor and provider preferences for SCP content and delivery methods).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone given§ DISCUSSIONThe review was limited to published studies in English and did not include relevant unpublished studies or research in other languages.
“Additionally, the review was limited to published studies in English and, thus, did not include relevant unpublished studies as well as research in other languages.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The outcomes assessed in the included studies adequately capture the benefits SCPs are intended to produce, so that null findings reflect a true absence of effect rather than unmeasured or unassessed benefits.
“Existing research provides little evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes and health care delivery.”
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?
A more comprehensive approach to survivorship care delivery is needed.
“a previous systematic review of 24 articles comprising 11 nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies concluded that the delivery of a SCP alone is unlikely to achieve the desired benefits, and a more comprehensive approach to survivorship care delivery is needed.43,44”
From Implementing a PROACTive Care Pathway to Empower and Support Survivors of Breast Cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [44]
A previous systematic review of 24 articles comprising 11 nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies concluded that the delivery of a SCP alone is unlikely to achieve the desired benefits.
“a previous systematic review of 24 articles comprising 11 nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies concluded that the delivery of a SCP alone is unlikely to achieve the desired benefits, and a more comprehensive approach to survivorship care delivery is needed.43,44”
From Implementing a PROACTive Care Pathway to Empower and Support Survivors of Breast Cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [44]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Conflicting study citation for identifying the PCP responsible for follow-up
MinorThe results attribute improved identification of the PCP responsible for follow-up to study 27, but the discussion attributes the same finding to study 23.
“greater likelihood of correctly identifying their PCP as responsible for follow-up care,27”
“greater likelihood of survivors correctly identifying their PCP as responsible for follow-up care.23”
Cites
Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3182408812 · Cited by 4,058 · see citing works
An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist
Bauer, M. S., Damschroder, L. J., Hagedorn, H., Smith, J. L., & Kilbourne, A. M. (2015) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9 · Cited by 2,023 · see citing works
From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor - Lost in Transition
Institute of Medicine and National Research Council (2006) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/11613 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
Runowicz, C. D., Leach, C. R., Henry, N. L., Henry, K. S., Mackey, H. T., Cowens‐Alvarado, R. L., Cannady, R. S., Pratt‐Chapman, M. L., Edge, S. B., Jacobs, L. A., et al. (2016) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21319 · Cited by 728 · see citing works
Grunfeld, E., Levine, M. N., Julian, J. A., Coyle, D., Szechtman, B., Mirsky, D., Verma, S., Dent, S. F., Sawka, C. A., Pritchard, K. I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.03.2235 · Cited by 541 · see citing works
Routine follow up of breast cancer in primary care: randomised trial
Grunfeld, E., Mant, D., Yudkin, P. L., Adewuyi-Dalton, R., Cole, D., Stewart, J., Fitzpatrick, R. M., & Vessey, M. P. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7058.665 · Cited by 403 · see citing works
Grunfeld, E., Julian, J. A., Pond, G. R., Maunsell, E., Coyle, D., Folkes, A., Joy, A. A., Provencher, L., Rayson, D., Rheaume, D., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.36.8373 · Cited by 315 · see citing works
Nekhlyudov, L., O'malley, D. M., & Hudson, S. V. (2017) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30570-8 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Survivorship care plans in research and practice
Salz, T., Oeffinger, K. C., McCabe, M. S., Layne, T. M., & Bach, P. B. (2012) · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20142 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Survivorship care plans in cancer: a systematic review of care plan outcomes
Brennan, M. E., Gormally, J. F., Butow, P., Boyle, F. M., & Spillane, A. J. (2014) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.505 · Cited by 221 · see citing works
Models of Cancer Survivorship Care: Overview and Summary of Current Evidence
Halpern, M. T., Viswanathan, M., Evans, T. S., Birken, S. A., Basch, E., & Mayer, D. K. (2015) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2014.001403 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Self-citationAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Expert Statement on Cancer Survivorship Care Planning
Mayer, D. K., Nekhlyudov, L., Snyder, C. F., Merrill, J. K., Wollins, D. S., & Shulman, L. N. (2014) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2014.001321 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Self-citationHowell, D., Hack, T. F., Oliver, T. K., Chulak, T., Mayo, S., Aubin, M., Chasen, M., Earle, C. C., Friedman, A. J., Green, E., et al. (2012) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-012-0232-z · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Risk-Based Health Care, the Cancer Survivor, the Oncologist, and the Primary Care Physician
McCabe, M. S., Partridge, A. H., Grunfeld, E., & Hudson, M. M. (2013) · Seminars in Oncology · doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2013.09.004 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Survivorship Care Plans: Prevalence and Barriers to Use
Birken, S. A., Mayer, D. K., & Weiner, B. J. (2013) · Journal of Cancer Education · doi:10.1007/s13187-013-0469-x · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Self-citationJefford, M., Lotfi‐Jam, K., Baravelli, C. M., Grogan, S., Rogers, M., Krishnasamy, M., Pezaro, C., Milne, D., Aranda, S. K., King, D. X., et al. (2011) · Cancer Nursing · doi:10.1097/ncc.0b013e3181f22f02 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Use of Survivorship Care Plans in the United States: Associations With Survivorship Care
Forsythe, L. P., Parry, C., Alfano, C. M., Kent, E. E., Leach, C. R., Haggstrom, D. A., Ganz, P. A., Aziz, N., & Rowland, J. H. (2013) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djt258 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Self-citationHershman, D. L., Greenlee, H., Awad, D., Kalinsky, K. M., Maurer, M., Kranwinkel, G., Brafman, L., Jayasena, R. M. D., Tsai, W., Neugut, A. I., et al. (2013) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2486-1 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Can't See the Forest for the Care Plan: A Call to Revisit the Context of Care Planning
Parry, C., Kent, E. E., Forsythe, L. P., Alfano, C. M., & Rowland, J. H. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2012.48.4618 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Self-citationNicolaije, K. A. H., Ezendam, N. P. M., Vos, M. C., Pijnenborg, J. M. A., Boll, D., Boss, E. A., Hermans, R. H. M., Engelhart, K. C. M., Haartsen, J. E., Pijlman, B. M., et al. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.60.3399 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Rubinstein, E. B., Miller, W. L., Hudson, S. V., Howard, J., O’Malley, D., Tsui, J., Lee, H. S., Bator, A., & Crabtree, B. F. (2017) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4747 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Oeffinger, K. C., Hudson, M. M., Mertens, A. C., Smith, S. M., Mitby, P. A., Eshelman‐Kent, D. A., Ford, J. S., Jones, J. K., Kamani, S., & Robison, L. L. (2010) · Pediatric Blood & Cancer · doi:10.1002/pbc.22696 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Wellness beyond Cancer Program: Building an Effective Survivorship Program
Rushton, M. K., Morash, R., Larocque, G., MacDonald-Liska, C., Stoica, L., DeGrasse, C., & SEGAL, R. J. (2015) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3747/co.22.2786 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Brothers, B. M., Easley, A., Salani, R., & Andersen, B. L. (2013) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.02.037 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Emery, J. D., Jefford, M., King, M. T., Hayne, D., Martin, A. J., Doorey, J., Hyatt, A., Habgood, E., Lim, T. S., Hawks, C., et al. (2016) · British Journal of Urology · doi:10.1111/bju.13593 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
for the FUPII Trial Investigators, Boekhout, A. H., Maunsell, E., Pond, G. R., Julian, J. A., Coyle, D., Levine, M. N., & Grunfeld, E. (2015) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-015-0443-1 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Blaauwbroek, R., Barf, H., Groenier, K. H., Kremer, L. C. M., van der Meer, K., Tissing, W. J. E., & Postma, A. (2011) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-011-0207-5 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Hill‐Kayser, C. E., Vachani, C. C., Hampshire, M. K., Jacobs, L. A., & Metz, J. M. (2009) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1223 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Jefford, M., Gough, K., Drosdowsky, A., Russell, L., Aranda, S. K., Butow, P. N., Phipps‐Nelson, J., Young, J. M., Krishnasamy, M., Ugalde, A., et al. (2016) · The Oncologist · doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0533 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Klemanski, D. L., Browning, K. K., & Kue, J. (2016) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-015-0452-0 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Maly, R. C., Liang, L.-J., Liu, Y., Griggs, J. J., & Ganz, P. A. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2016.68.9497 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Survivorship care plans: Is there buy‐in from community oncology providers?
Salz, T., McCabe, M. S., Onstad, E. E., Baxi, S. S., Deming, R. L., Franco, R., Glenn, L. A., Harper, G. R., Jumonville, A. J., Payne, R., et al. (2013) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.28472 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Hudson, M. M., Leisenring, W. M., Stratton, K. K., Tinner, N., Steen, B. D., Ogg, S. W., Barnes, L. S., Oeffinger, K. C., Robison, L. L., & Cox, C. L. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.57.3493 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Blinder, V. S., Norris, V. W., Peacock, N. W., Griggs, J. J., Harrington, D. P., Moore, A. L., Theriault, R. L., & Partridge, A. H. (2012) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.27856 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Cost Effectiveness of a Survivorship Care Plan for Breast Cancer Survivors
Coyle, D., Grunfeld, E., Coyle, K., Pond, G. R., Julian, J. A., & Levine, M. N. (2014) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2013.001142 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Spain, P., Oeffinger, K. C., Candela, J., McCabe, M. S., Ma, X., & Tonorezos, E. S. (2012) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2011.000345 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Avoiding Implementation Errors in Cancer Survivorship Care Plan Effectiveness Studies
Mayer, D. K., Birken, S. A., & Chen, R. C. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.62.6937 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Self-citationHigh Level Use and Satisfaction with Internet-Based Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Plans
Hill‐Kayser, C. E., Vachani, C. C., Hampshire, M. K., & Metz, J. M. (2011) · The Breast Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01195.x · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Survivorship Care Planning: Why Is It Taking So Long?
Birken, S. A., & Mayer, D. K. (2017) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2017.0148 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Self-citationBerman, A. T., DeCesaris, C. M., Simone, C. B., Vachani, C. C., DiLullo, G. A., Hampshire, M. K., Metz, J. M., & Hill‐Kayser, C. E. (2016) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2015.008904 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Internet-Based Survivorship Care Plans for Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Pilot Study
Szalda, D. E., Schwartz, L. A., Schapira, M. M., Jacobs, L. A., Kim, E., Vachani, C. C., Metz, J. M., & Hill‐Kayser, C. E. (2016) · Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology · doi:10.1089/jayao.2016.0026 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Smith, K. C., Tolbert, E. E., Hannum, S. M., et al. (2016) · JMIR Cancer · doi:10.2196/cancer.5947 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Utilization of Internet-Based Survivorship Care Plans by Lung Cancer Survivors
Hill‐Kayser, C. E., Vachani, C. C., Hampshire, M. K., Jacobs, L. A., & Metz, J. M. (2009) · Clinical Lung Cancer · doi:10.3816/clc.2009.n.047 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Survivorship Care Plans: Necessary But Not Sufficient?
Mayer, D. K. (2014) · Clinical journal of oncology nursing · doi:10.1188/14.cjon.s1.7-8 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- American College of Surgeons Commision on Cancer, 2012, Cancer Program Standards 2012: Ensuring Patient-Centered Care
- Martin TA, 2013, JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 11, 258
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Improved models of care for cancer survivors
Jefford, M., Howell, D., Li, Q., Lisy, K., Maher, J., Alfano, C. M., Rynderman, M., & Emery, J. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00306-3 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Cancer Survivorship Practices: An Overview
Janssen, S. H. M., van der Graaf, W. T. A., van der Meer, D. J., Manten‐Horst, E., & Husson, O. (2021) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers13194847 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
“Despite widespread effort, the use of SCPs in practice remains suboptimal, and evidence regarding their impact on survivors’ outcomes is limited [150–153].”
Vaz-Luis, I., Masiero, M., Cavaletti, G., Cervantes, A., Chlebowski, R. T., Curigliano, G., Felip, E., Ferreira, A. R., Ganz, P. A., Hegarty, J., et al. (2022) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.1941 · Cited by 208 · see citing works
Survivorship Care Plans in Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Care Plan Outcomes
Hill, R., Wakefield, C. E., Cohn, R. J., Fardell, J. E., Brierley, M., Kothe, E. J., Jacobsen, P. B., Hetherington, K., & Mercieca‐Bebber, R. (2019) · The Oncologist · doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0184 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
“However, these reviews were descriptive (rather than quantitative), and it was difficult to draw conclusions because of design differences noted in included studies [14, 15].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationMichel, G., Mulder, R. L., van der Pal, H. J. H., Skinner, R., Bárdi, E., Brown, M. C., Vetsch, J., Frey, E., Windsor, R. E., Kremer, L. C. M., et al. (2019) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-019-00795-5 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
“However, clear evidence for the effectiveness of an SCP to improve LTFU and survivor’s health in the long term is still lacking [102].”
BackgroundAlfano, C. M., Jefford, M., Maher, J., Birken, S. A., & Mayer, D. K. (2019) · American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book · doi:10.1200/edbk_238267 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Self-citationBlueprint for cancer research: Critical gaps and opportunities
Elmore, L. W., Greer, S. F., Daniels, E. C., Saxe, C. C., Melner, M. H., Krawiec, G. M., Cance, W. G., & Phelps, W. C. (2020) · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21652 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Clinical Oncology Society of Australia position statement on cancer survivorship care
Vardy, J. L., Chan, R. J., Koczwara, B., Lisy, K., Cohn, R. J., Joske, D. J. L., Dhillon, H. M., & Jefford, M. (2019) · Australian Journal of General Practice · doi:10.31128/ajgp-07-19-4999 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
The ‘Survivorship Passport’ for childhood cancer survivors
Haupt, R., Essiaf, S., Dellacasa, C. M., et al. (2018) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2018.07.006 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
“A recent systematic review of studies addressing this issue [27] has shown only a minimal evidence of a beneficial effect that mainly refers to quality of life measures, but not on distal health outcomes.”
BackgroundLong-term care for people treated for cancer during childhood and adolescence
Tonorezos, E. S., Cohn, R. J., Glaser, A., Lewin, J. H., Poon, E. Y. L., Wakefield, C. E., & Oeffinger, K. C. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00460-3 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
NCCN Guidelines Insights: Survivorship, Version 2.2019
Sanft, T. B., Denlinger, C. S., Armenian, S. H., Baker, K. S., Broderick, G. A., Demark‐Wahnefried, W., Friedman, D. L., Goldman, M. E., Hudson, M. M., Khakpour, N., et al. (2019) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2019.0034 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Self-citationYan, A. P., Chen, Y., Henderson, T. O., et al. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.19.01825 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Self-citationMollica, M. A., McWhirter, G. C., Tonorezos, E. S., Fenderson, J. L., Freyer, D. R., Jefford, M., Luevano, C. J., Mullett, T. W., Nasso, S. F., Schilling, E. J., et al. (2024) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-024-01602-6 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
“First, consensus meeting discussions included the need to de-emphasize survivorship care plan documentation, given limited evidence on improving survivor outcomes [20].”
BackgroundSelf-citationChallenges and opportunities in the care of survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers
Fidler-Benaoudia, M. M., Frobisher, C., Hawkins, M. M., & Nathan, P. C. (2019) · Pediatric Blood & Cancer · doi:10.1002/pbc.27668 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Davidson, A. R., Kelly, J. T., Ball, L., Morgan, M. A. J., & Reidlinger, D. P. (2022) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/s12875-021-01595-6 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
“However, care plans alone did not influence distal outcomes such as patient-reported health status, perceptions of care, health care delivery, and health care use [81].”
BackgroundHardiman, K. M., Felder, S. I., Friedman, G., Migaly, J., Paquette, I. M., & Feingold, D. L. (2021) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1097/dcr.0000000000001984 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Blaes, A. H., Adamson, P. C., Foxhall, L. E., & Bhatia, S. (2020) · JCO Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.19.00801 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Majhail, N. S., Murphy, E., Laud, P. W., Preussler, J. M., Denzen, E. M., Abetti, B., Adams, A. J., Besser, R. M., Burns, L. J., Černý, J., et al. (2018) · Haematologica · doi:10.3324/haematol.2018.203919 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
“Age at HCT, years; Median (range) 59 (19-81) 59 (20-77)”
BackgroundLai-Kwon, J. E., Heynemann, S., Hart, N. H., Chan, R. J., Smith, T. J., Nekhlyudov, L., & Jefford, M. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.22.02212 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Follow-Up Care for Breast and Colorectal Cancer Across the Globe: Survey Findings From 27 Countries
Mollica, M. A., Mayer, D. K., Oeffinger, K. C., Kim, Y., Buckenmaier, S. S., Sivaram, S., Muha, C., Taib, N. A. M., Andritsch, E., Asuzu, C. C., et al. (2020) · JCO Global Oncology · doi:10.1200/go.20.00180 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationSurvivorship after adolescent and young adult cancer: models of care, disparities, and opportunities
Berkman, A. M., Betts, A. C., Beauchemin, M., Parsons, S. K., Freyer, D. R., & Roth, M. E. (2024) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djae119 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Hart, N. H., Nekhlyudov, L., Smith, T. J., Yee, J., Fitch, M. I., Crawford, G. B., Koczwara, B., Ashbury, F. D., Lustberg, M. B., Mollica, M. A., et al. (2024) · JCO Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/op.23.00716 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Beesley, V. L., Alemayehu, C. M., & Webb, P. M. (2019) · European Journal of Cancer Care · doi:10.1111/ecc.13057 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Faller, H., Hass, H. G., Engehausen, D. G., Reuss-Borst, M. A., & Wöckel, A. (2019) · Acta Oncologica · doi:10.1080/0284186x.2018.1543947 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“Providing patients with a survivorship care plan detailing the available resources might help alleviating the need for coordination of care, although evidence is insufficient at this point [43].”
BackgroundRastogi, S., Tevaarwerk, A. J., Sesto, M. E., Remortel, B. J. V., Date, P., Gangnon, R. E., Thraen-Borowski, K. M., & Cadmus‐Bertram, L. (2020) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.5524 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Cancer Survivorship Care in the United States at Facilities Accredited by the Commission on Cancer
Stal, J., Miller, K. A., Mullett, T. W., Boughey, J. C., Francescatti, A. B., Funk, E., Nelson, H., & Freyer, D. R. (2024) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18736 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
de Rooij, B. H., Ezendam, N. P. M., Vos, M. C., Pijnenborg, J. M. A., Boll, D., Kruitwagen, R. F. P. M., & van de Poll-Franse, L. V. (2018) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.31844 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“Despite these efforts, the evidence base for the impact of SCPs among cancer survivors is still inconclusive, and directions for future implementation of SCPs remain under debate.(3) Randomized controlled trials (RTCs) have failed to identify the benefits of SCP delivery on patient satisfaction, quality of life, and d…”
BackgroundOncology Medical Home: ASCO and COA Standards
Woofter, K., Kennedy, E. B., Adelson, K. B., Bowman, R., Brodie, R., Dickson, N. R., Gerber, R., Fields, K. K., Murtaugh, C., Polite, B. N., et al. (2021) · JCO Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/op.21.00167 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
“In another review that included a similar group of studies to Hill et al, the authors found that it was difficult to draw conclusions about SCPs because most studies focused on the feasibility and acceptability of SCP delivery; although some beneficial effects were found, they were limited to single outcomes from sing…”
Hart, N. H., Nekhlyudov, L., Smith, T. J., Yee, J., Fitch, M. I., Crawford, G. B., Koczwara, B., Ashbury, F. D., Lustberg, M. B., Mollica, M. A., et al. (2024) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-024-08465-8 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“While existing literature has not shown the necessary evidence that survivorship care plans improve clinical outcomes [39–41], cancer survivors and caregivers continue to value, and report benefit from such documents, supporting their use [42–44].”
BackgroundThe Future of Childhood Cancer Survivorship
Dixon, S. B., Chow, E. J., Hjorth, L., Hudson, M. M., Kremer, L. C. M., Morton, L. M., Nathan, P. C., Ness, K. K., Oeffinger, K. C., & Armstrong, G. T. (2020) · Pediatric Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.pcl.2020.07.013 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Su, H.-C. I., Stark, S. S., Kwan, B., Boles, S. G., Chingos, D. T., Ehren, J. L., Gorman, J. R., Krychman, M., Romero, S. A. D., Mao, J. J. J., et al. (2019) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-019-05260-6 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Breast cancer survivorship in rural settings: a systematic review
Anbari, A. B., Wanchai, A., & Graves, R. S. (2020) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05308-0 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
McDonough, A. L., Rabin, J. T., Horick, N., et al. (2019) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.18.00740 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Geramita, E. M., Parker, I. R., Brufsky, J. W., Diergaarde, B. B., & Londen, G. J. V. (2019) · Journal of Cancer Education · doi:10.1007/s13187-019-01585-4 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
“Moreover, a recent systematic review suggests that survivorship care plans may have limited impact on health outcomes and patient satisfaction [25].”
BackgroundTurner, J., Yates, P. M., Kenny, L., Gordon, L. G., Burmeister, B. H., Hughes, B. G. M., McCarthy, A. L., Perry, C., Chan, R. J., Paviour, A., et al. (2019) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-019-04748-7 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Hua, A., Sesto, M. E., Zhang, X., et al. (2019) · Journal of Cancer Education · doi:10.1007/s13187-018-1457-y · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Use and impact of breast cancer survivorship care plans: a systematic review
Joshi, A., Larkins, S., Evans, R., Moodley, N., Brown, A., & Sabesan, S. S. (2021) · Breast Cancer · doi:10.1007/s12282-021-01267-4 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“This review builds on findings from a previous review of SCPs in BC which considered RCTs exclusively [25] and other reviews that addressed SCPs in several cancers and did not consider BC independently [16, 55, 56].”
Pinto, M., Calafiore, D., Piccirillo, M. C., Costa, M., Taşkıran, Ö. Ö., & Alessandro de, S. I. R. E. (2022) · Current Oncology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11912-022-01262-8 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Factors associated with health-related quality of life in a cohort of cancer survivors in New Jersey
Manne, S. L., Devine, K. A., Hudson, S. V., Kashy, D. A., O’Malley, D. M., Paddock, L. E., Bandera, E. V., Llanos, A. A. M., Fong, A. J., Singh, N., et al. (2023) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/s12885-023-11098-5 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“Although Jefford and colleagues [51] found that survivors who stated they had been provided a care plan reported higher HRQoL, a review of the literature on survivorship care plans published in 2018 concluded that the benefit of survivorship care plans on HRQoL was not sufficiently shown from the existing literature […”
BackgroundUser-centered design of a longitudinal care plan for children with medical complexity
Desai, A. D., Wang, G., Wignall, J., Kinard, D., Singh, V., Adams, S. L., & Pratt, W. (2020) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa193 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“Caregivers N1⁄4 10 Age, years <35 2 (20) 36–45 3 (30) >45 5 (50) Ethnicity Hispanic or Latinx 3 (30) Not Hispanic or Latinx 7 (70) Race White 9 (90) Not White 1 (10) Level of education At most high school graduate or GED 2 (20) Some college/university without a 4-year degree 3 (30) 4-year university degree or more 5 (…”
Thanarajasingam, G., Minasian, L. M., Bhatnagar, V., Cavalli, F., Claro, R. A. D., Dueck, A. C., El-Galaly, T. C., Everest, N., Geißler, J., Gisselbrecht, C., et al. (2022) · The Lancet Haematology · doi:10.1016/s2352-3026(22)00045-x · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Hawkins, M. M., Bhatia, S., Henderson, T. O., Nathan, P. C., Yan, A. P., Teepen, J. C., & Morton, L. M. (2020) · Pediatric Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.pcl.2020.07.006 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Self-citationReceipt of a survivorship care plan and self-reported health behaviors among cancer survivors
Shay, L. A., Schmidt, S., Dioun, S. I., Grimes, A., & Embry, L. M. (2019) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-019-00740-6 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Heiden, B. T., Eaton, D. B., Chang, S., Yan, Y., Schoen, M. W., Chen, L., Smock, N., Patel, M. R., Kreisel, D., Nava, R. G., et al. (2021) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1016/j.chest.2021.12.634 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Austin, J. D., Robertson, M. C., Shay, L. A., & Balasubramanian, B. A. (2019) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-019-00785-7 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Luo, X., Li, J., Chen, M., Gong, J., Xu, Y., & Li, Q. (2021) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.5657 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“Evidence has shown that SCPs appeared to be feasible and had the potential to improve patient perception of care coordination, but there was minimal evidence that SCPs affected patient‐reported outcomes, which was consistent with a previous review.(71) This reminds us to reflect on the mechanisms and role involved in…”
BackgroundResultHong, Y.-R., Yadav, S., Suk, R., Khanijahani, A., Erim, D., & Turner, K. (2021) · Cancer Medicine · doi:10.1002/cam4.3918 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Taylor, K., Chivers, P., Bulsara, C., Joske, D. J. L., Bulsara, M. K., & Monterosso, L. (2019) · European Journal of Oncology Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2019.03.005 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Contemporary consumer perspectives on prostate cancer survivorship: Fifty voices
Dunn, J. C., Ralph, N., Green, A., Frydenberg, M., & Chambers, S. K. (2020) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.5306 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
“A recent review identified a lack of follow-up care as a key reason why men with prostate cancer are left with unmet needs.(29) This issue is made more problematic by the lack of review-based evidence for care coordination and surveillance for recurrence.”
BackgroundTesting the Impact of a Cancer Survivorship Patient Engagement Toolkit on Selected Health Outcomes
Nahm, E., Miller, K. D., McQuaige, M., Corbitt, N., Jaidar, N., Rosenblatt, P., Zhu, S., Son, H., Hertsenberg, L., Wickersham, K. E., et al. (2019) · Oncology nursing forum · doi:10.1188/19.onf.572-584 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Integrating Primary Care Providers through the Seasons of Survivorship
Chaput, G., & SUSSMAN, J. S. (2019) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3747/co.26.4687 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Survivorship objectives in comprehensive cancer control plans: a systematic review
Mollica, M. A., Falisi, A. L., Geiger, A. M., Jacobsen, P. B., Lunsford, N. B., Pratt‐Chapman, M. L., Townsend, J. S., & Nekhlyudov, L. (2020) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-019-00832-3 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“Implementation of SCPs has been challenging, however, due to unreimbursed clinical time and human and technological resources to support SCP development and delivery to patients and other providers [29, 30].”
BackgroundSelf-citationHealth information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review
Mikles, S. P., Griffin, A. C., & Chung, A. E. (2021) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocab134 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Implementing a PROACTive Care Pathway to Empower and Support Survivors of Breast Cancer
Franzoi, M. A., Degousée, L., Martin, E., Semedo, P. M., Aupomerol, M., Soldato, D., Di Meglio, A., Chiodi, C., Barbier, A., Chaouachi, H., et al. (2023) · JCO Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/op.23.00016 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Bateman, J. P., Egan, R., & Maclennan, K. (2023) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09580-8 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“Other studies have described barriers to the provision of survivorship care plans to cancer survivors, including lack of time and resources among healthcare providers; lack of clarity around who is responsible for preparing the plan and lack of reimbursement for this role; and poor communication and collaboration betw…”
BackgroundDelivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis: One Decade Later
Nekhlyudov, L., Levit, L. A., & Ganz, P. A. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco-24-01243 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
King, J. E., O'Connor, M. C., Shohet, E., et al. (2022) · Pediatric Blood & Cancer · doi:10.1002/pbc.30070 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Syrjala, K. L., Walsh, C., Yi, J. C., Leisenring, W. M., Rajotte, E. J., Voutsinas, J. M., Ganz, P. A., Jacobs, L. A., Palmer, S. C., Partridge, A. H., et al. (2021) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-021-01105-8 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“This finding stands in contrast to other RCTs with adult survivors and meta-analyses that demonstrate no improved outcomes between SCP recipients and controls for distress, anxiety, depression, confidence in survivorship knowledge, physical functioning, self-efficacy, or with satisfaction with follow-up care and infor…”
ResultPerspectives of Survivorship Care Plans Among Older Breast Cancer Survivors: A Pilot Study
Krok‐Schoen, J. L., Naughton, M. J., Noonan, A. M., Pisegna, J., DeSalvo, J., & Lustberg, M. B. (2020) · Cancer Control · doi:10.1177/1073274820917208 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Cancer survivorship—a framework for quality cancer care
Zebrack, B. (2023) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djad266 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Deckx, L., Chow, K. H., Askew, D. A., van Driel, M., Mitchell, G. K., & van den Akker, M. (2020) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.5612 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“Although there is little evidence that survivorship care plans improve health outcomes, they do have positive effects on, for example, the amount of information received and satisfaction with care.(62) As most survivorship care plans include a psychosocial component, they might also serve as an”
BackgroundChahine, S., & Urquhart, R. (2019) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-019-04685-5 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Parker, P. A., Banerjee, S. C., Matasar, M. J., Bylund, C. L., Schofield, E., Li, Y., Jacobsen, P. B., Astrow, A. B., Leventhal, H., Horwitz, S. M., et al. (2020) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.5371 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“For example, a recent systematic review found that there was little evidence that survivorship care plans impacted the most commonly assessed outcomes (eg, physical, functional, and psychological well-being), though survivorship care plans did impact amount of information received and satisfaction with care.(11) We re…”
BackgroundSelf-citationArthur, E. K., Pisegna, J., Oliveri, J. M., Aker, H., & Krok‐Schoen, J. L. (2022) · Journal of Geriatric Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2022.08.004 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Krok‐Schoen, J. L., DeSalvo, J., Klemanski, D., Stephens, C., Noonan, A. M., Bose‐Brill, S., & Lustberg, M. B. (2019) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-019-04855-5 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“Survivorship care plans (SCPs) may or may not improve existing and potential survivorship issues experienced by breast cancer survivors after cancer treatment [5].”
BackgroundPrimary Care Provider Involvement in Thyroid Cancer Survivorship Care
Radhakrishnan, A., Reyes‐Gastelum, D., Gay, B. L., Hawley, S. T., Hamilton, A. S., Ward, K. C., Wallner, L. P., & Haymart, M. R. (2020) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgaa437 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Chow, E. J., Baldwin, L., Hagen, A. M., Hudson, M. M., Gibson, T. M., Komal, K., McDonald, A. J., Nathan, P. C., Syrjala, K. L., Taylor, S. L., et al. (2019) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2019.105915 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Dhruva, A., Wu, C., Miaskowski, C. A., Hartogensis, W., Rugo, H. S., Adler, S. R., Kaptchuk, T. J., Kelkar, R., Agarawal, S., Vadodaria, A., et al. (2020) · Global Advances in Health and Medicine · doi:10.1177/2164956120964712 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“While patients may respond positively to elements of SCPs, such as satisfaction with the information received,(24) SCPs do not address symptoms or QOL outcomes.(23) Therefore, the investigation of other approaches that address symptoms and QOL may prove complementary to SCPs.”
BackgroundCortiana, V., Abbas, R. H., Nadar, S., Mahendru, D., Gambill, J. L., Menon, G. P., Park, C. H., & Leyfman, Y. (2024) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers16061216 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“This forward-looking approach ensures that interventions are precisely aligned with each patient’s specific risks and needs, optimizing the program’s overall impact [16].”
BackgroundHohmann, N. S., McDaniel, C. C., Mason, S. W., et al. (2020) · Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research · doi:10.1111/jphs.12334 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Austin, J. D., Allicock, M. A., Atem, F., Lee, S. J. C., Fernández, M. E., & Balasubramanian, B. A. (2020) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-020-00896-6 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2025: An urgent call to optimize health after cancer
Schapira, L., & Duffy, C. (2025) · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.70017 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Hall, A. G., Syrjala, K. L., Ketterl, T. G., Ganz, P. A., Jacobs, L. A., Palmer, S. C., Partridge, A. H., Rajotte, E. J., Mueller, B. A., & Baker, K. S. (2023) · Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology · doi:10.1089/jayao.2022.0109 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“However, studies evaluating the efficacy of survivorship care plans have not demonstrated a strong impact on adherence 38–40 ; therefore, exclusion of these patients may not have significantly altered adherence levels in our analyses.”
Heiden, B. T., Eaton, D. B., Chang, S., et al. (2022) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djac208 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Chu, A. K., Mutsaers, B., & Lebel, S. (2022) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3390/curroncol29100577 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“Thus, it appears that studies should measure outcomes that are more proximally related to SCPs’ stated goals of improving the coordination of follow-up care, increasing understanding of provider roles, and increasing knowledge of follow-up care for patient and PCPs [7].”
BackgroundInfluentialGrunfeld, E. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.19.01098 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Understanding and addressing global inequities in cancer survivorship care
Jacobsen, P. B., & Mollica, M. A. (2019) · Journal of Psychosocial Oncology Research and Practice · doi:10.1097/or9.0000000000000005 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationBeaupin, L. K., Uwazurike, O. C., & Hydeman, J. A. (2018) · Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology · doi:10.1089/jayao.2018.0061 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Current status of and future perspectives on care for cancer survivors in China
Song, J. Y., Li, R., Hu, X., Ding, G., Chen, M., & Jin, C. (2023) · Global Health & Medicine · doi:10.35772/ghm.2023.01014 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Swoboda, C. M., Fareed, N., Walker, D. M., & Huerta, T. R. (2019) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2019.08.036 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Implementation of a Brief Screening Tool to Identify Needs of Breast Cancer Survivors
McDonough, A. L., Lei, Y. Y., Kwak, A. H., Haggett, D., Jimenez, R., Johnston, K. T., Moy, B., Spring, L. M., & Peppercorn, J. M. (2020) · Clinical Breast Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2020.07.006 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Tulk, J., Wurz, A. J., Hou, S., et al. (2023) · The Journal of Rural Health · doi:10.1111/jrh.12774 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Wallner, L. P., Abrahamse, P. H., Gargaro, J. G., Radhakrishnan, A., Mullins, M. A., An, L. C., Griggs, J. J., Schott, A. F., Ayanian, J. Z., Sales, A. E., et al. (2021) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-021-06257-w · Cited by 14 · see citing works
FOX, J. A., Thamm, C., Mitchell, G. K., et al. (2021) · Health & Social Care in the Community · doi:10.1111/hsc.13549 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Mohamed, M., Ahmed, M. M., Williams, A. M., Gilmore, N. J., Lin, P., Yilmaz, S., Jensen‐Battaglia, M., Mustian, K. M., Janelsins, M. C., & Mohile, S. G. (2024) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-024-01589-0 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Kacew, A. J., Jacobson, S., Sheade, J. B., et al. (2021) · Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology · doi:10.1089/jayao.2021.0096 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citationHas the Quality of Patient–Provider Communication About Survivorship Care Improved?
Rai, A., Chawla, N., Han, X., Rim, S. H., Smith, T. G., de Moor, J. S., & Yabroff, K. R. (2019) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.19.00157 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
“Other challenges include clinician time required to create SCPs, lack of reimbursement for this time, and the lack of evidence that SCPs improve outcomes.(19,34,36,37) Concerns also have been raised about an overemphasis on the means— the documentation and distribution of SCPs—but an insufficient focus on the ends: st…”
BackgroundFollow-up and Cancer Survivorship
Neuman, H. B., & Schumacher, J. R. M. (2022) · Surgical Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.suc.2022.08.009 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Davis, S. N., O’Malley, D. M., Bator, A., Ohman‐Strickland, P., Clemow, L., Ferrante, J. M., Crabtree, B. F., Miller, S. M., Findley, P. A., & Hudson, S. V. (2019) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/s12885-019-5531-6 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Hill, R., Mercieca‐Bebber, R., Fardell, J. E., Wakefield, C. E., Signorelli, C., Webber, K., Cohn, R. J., & ANZCHOG Study Group (2023) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.34984 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Sauro, K. M., Maini, A., Machan, M., Lorenzetti, D., Chandarana, S. P., & Dort, J. C. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043374 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Predictors and impact of survivorship care plans and survivorship care visits
Saiganesh, H., Duffy, C. M., Chrysanthopoulou, S. A., et al. (2023) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-023-01334-z · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“In 2015, the Commission on Cancer made provision of an SCP a quality benchmark, despite the lack of evidence of its impact on the quality of care post-treatment [5, 6].”
Delivering long-term cancer care in primary care
Gopal, D. P., de Rooij, B. H., Ezendam, N. P. M., et al. (2020) · British Journal of General Practice · doi:10.3399/bjgp20x709481 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Banegas, M. P., Emerson, M. A., Adams, A. S., Achacoso, N. S., Chawla, N., Alexeeff, S., & Habel, L. A. (2018) · Journal of Cancer Survivorship · doi:10.1007/s11764-018-0716-6 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
The Handbook of Wellness Medicine
Snellings, J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108650182 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Dixit, N., Burke, N. J., Rodriguez, G. M., Sarkar, U., Cicerelli, B., DeVore, J. D., & Nápoles, A. M. (2020) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-019-05277-z · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Tawfik, B., Jaffe, S. A., Mohler, L., Oomen, J., Gil, I. S., Chamberlain, R., Gagnon, S., Kano, M. A., Gundelach, A. C., Ryan, S. R., et al. (2021) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-021-06043-w · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“Most SCP implementation studies do not include delivery of the SCPs to PCPs [15], but those that do include this information describe intensive efforts to ensure that PCPs respond to the SCP and integrate it into their practice [22].”
BackgroundKozul, C., Stafford, L., Little, R., Bousman, C., Park, A., Shanahan, K., & Mann, G. B. (2020) · Clinical journal of oncology nursing · doi:10.1188/20.cjon.e34-e42 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Hou, S., Tran, A., Cho, S., Forbes, C., Forster, V. J., Stokoe, M., Allapitan, E., Wakefield, C. E., Wiener, L. S., Heathcote, L. C., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.867151 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“Other, more recent studies have found a similar sign of resilience and protective mechanisms identified in survivors and their families as they navigate the pandemic (e.g., Wimberly et al., 2021; Jacobson et al., 2022).”
ResultHealth‐related quality of life among colorectal cancer survivors of diverse sexual orientations
Boehmer, U., Ozonoff, A., Winter, M. R., Berklein, F. C., Potter, J. E., Hartshorn, K. L., Ward, K. C., Ceballos, R. M., & Clark, M. A. (2021) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.33762 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jacobsen, P. B., DeRosa, A. P., Henderson, T. O., Mayer, D. K., Moskowitz, C. S., Paskett, E. D., & Rowland, J. H.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Jacobsen, Paul B.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2018-07-10
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 2088-2100
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- PMC
- PMC6036622
- OpenAlex
- W2803946275
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 4.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Pfizer
- National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748, P30CA016058)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Keywords
- cancer survivorship care plans, cancer survivors, follow-up care, patient-reported outcomes, health care utilization, satisfaction with care, psychophysical well-being, functional well-being
- MeSH terms
- Cancer Survivors, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Neoplasms, Patient Care Planning, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.
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
