Cited by 15Patient Satisfaction in HealthcareCancer survivorship and careHealthcare Quality and Management

A case study of patient journey mapping to identify gaps in healthcare: Learning from experience with cancer diagnosis and treatment

Open access
Andre William Kushniruk, Elizabeth Marie Borycki, Avi Parush, | |·2020·Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal

Abstract

Journey mapping methods have a number of practical uses. One of the most promising applications in the area of healthcare is to apply patient journey mapping to identify a patient’s pathway through their healthcare journey. Nowhere is this more important than in the area of cancer care. With lengthy wait times in many countries and the complexity of care paths that cancer patients travel, there is ample opportunity to identify both gaps in care as well as opportunities to improve care processes. In this article the authors discuss a case study of a patient journey involving multiple care organizations, several health professionals and care in both Canada and the United States. By applying patient journey mapping a simplified version of such complexity can be presented in a visual and succinct way, allowing health professionals and managers of healthcare organizations to identify where inefficiencies in care and patient safety issues occur. Furthermore, this mapping can form the basis for optimizing care processes and holds considerable promise for patient-centred healthcare. Implications of using patient journey mapping for improving cancer care and healthcare more generally are discussed.

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 · 10.34105/j.kmel.2020.12.022

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kushniruk, A. W., Borycki, E. M., Parush, A., & |, |.
Affiliations
  • University of Victoria (CA)
  • Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL)
Venue
Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal
Published
2020-12-26
Pages
405-418
ISSN
2073-7904 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3145355484
Cited by
15
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Knowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
patient journey mapping, cancer care, care pathways, care gaps, patient waiting time, patient safety, patient-centered care, healthcare quality improvement

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