4.7 Review

COVID-19 and the multidisciplinary care of patients with lung cancer: an evidence-based review and commentary

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 125, 期 5, 页码 629-640

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-021-01361-6

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Doctoral Research Fellowship (DRF) [DRF-2016-09-054, DRF-2017-10-132]
  2. Royal Marsden Partners (RMP) Research Fellowship
  3. NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London at King's College London
  4. Department of Health's NIHR Biomedical Research Centre's funding scheme
  5. Cancer Research UK (CRUK) Early Diagnosis Advisory Group (EDAG) [C11558/A25623]
  6. Astra Zeneca
  7. MRC Clinical Academic Research Partnership [MR/T02481X/1]
  8. National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [DRF-2017-10-132, DRF-2016-09-054] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)
  9. MRC [MR/T02481X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Delivering lung cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic is challenging due to the lack of evidence-based reviews on COVID-19 and lung cancer. A review of 15 published papers identified cross-cutting themes and challenges, highlighting the need for continued studies to guide evidence-based decision-making.
Delivering lung cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant and ongoing challenges. There is a lack of published COVID-19 and lung cancer evidence-based reviews, including for the whole patient pathway. We searched for COVID-19 and lung cancer publications and brought together a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to review and comment on the evidence and challenges. A rapid review of the literature was undertaken up to 28 October 2020, producing 144 papers, with 113 full texts screened. We focused on new primary data collection (qualitative or quantitative evidence) and excluded case reports, editorials and commentaries. Following exclusions, 15 published papers were included in the review and are summarised. They included one qualitative paper and 14 quantitative studies (surveys or cohort studies), with a total of 2295 lung cancer patients data included (mean study size 153 patients; range 7-803). Review of current evidence and commentary included awareness and help-seeking; lung cancer screening; primary care assessment and referral; diagnosis and treatment in secondary care, including oncology and surgery; patient experience and palliative care. Cross-cutting themes and challenges were identified using qualitative methods for patients, healthcare professionals and service delivery, with a clear need for continued studies to guide evidence-based decision-making.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据