↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing clinical and organizational practice in cancer survivor transitions between specialized oncology and primary care teams: a realist evaluation of multiple case studies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Optimizing clinical and organizational practice in cancer survivor transitions between specialized oncology and primary care teams: a realist evaluation of multiple case studies
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2785-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominique Tremblay, Catherine Prady, Karine Bilodeau, Nassera Touati, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Martin Fortin, Isabelle Gaboury, Jean Rodrigue, Marie-France L’Italien

Abstract

Cancer is now viewed as a chronic disease, presenting challenges to follow-up and survivorship care. Models to shift from haphazard, suboptimal and fragmented episodes of care to an integrated cancer care continuum must be developed, tested and implemented. Numerous studies demonstrate improved care when follow-up is assured by both oncology and primary care providers rather than either group alone. However, there is little data on the roles assumed by specialized oncology teams and primary care providers and the extent to which they work together. This study aims to develop, pilot test and measure outcomes of an innovative risk-based coordinated cancer care model for patients transitioning from specialized oncology teams to primary care providers. This multiple case study using a sequential mixed-methods design rests on a theory-driven realist evaluation approach to understand how transitions might be improved. The cases are two health regions in Quebec, Canada, defined by their geographic territory. Each case includes a Cancer Centre and three Family Medicine Groups selected based on differences in their determining characteristics. Qualitative data will be collected from document review (scientific journal, grey literature, local documentation), semi-directed interviews with key informants, and observation of care coordination practices. Qualitative data will be supplemented with a survey to measure the outcome of the coordinated model among providers (scope of practice, collaboration, relational coordination, leadership) and patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal or prostate cancer (access to care, patient-centredness, communication, self-care, survivorship profile, quality of life). Results from descriptive and regression analyses will be triangulated with thematic analysis of qualitative data. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods data will be interpreted within and across cases in order to identify context-mechanism associations that explain outcomes. The study will provide empirical data on a risk-based coordinated model of cancer care to guide actions at different levels in the health system. This in-depth multiple case study using a realist approach considers both the need for context-specific intervention research and the imperative to address research gaps regarding coordinated models of cancer care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 11 10%
Other 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 16%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 37 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,486,175
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,625
of 7,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,444
of 440,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#119
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 153 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.