Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating supportive cancer care: are we missing an opportunity?

  • Editorial
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Cancer care can be described as a system or complex network of interventions delivered at various times and places with different intentions.

Cancer care as a system

Cancer care can include medical treatments, psychosocial care, complementary and alternative medicine, self-care, as well as the process of healing and the context in which care is delivered.

Evaluating cancer care

Whereas evaluating individual cancer treatments can be difficult, evaluating cancer care is even more challenging and requires a research framework that relies on methodologies capable of addressing its holistic, individualized, and complex nature.

In summary

We suggest that research frameworks focused on studying complex or whole systems are a promising evaluation approach and an opportunity for further exploration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Andersen B (1992) Psychological interventions for cancer patients to enhance the quality of life. J Consult Clin Psychol 60:552–568

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bell IR, Caspi O, Schwartz GER, Grant K, Gaudet T, Rychener D, Maizes V, Weil A (2002) Integrative medicine and systemic outcomes research. Arch Intern Med 162:133–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chan JJ, Chan JE (2000) Medicine for the millennium: the challenge of postmodernism. Med J Aust 172:332–334

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, Georgiou A, Kleijnen J (2001) Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet 357:757–762

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fawzy I, Fawzy N, Arndt LA, Pasnau RO (1995) Critical review of psychosocial interventions in cancer care. Arch Gen Psychiatry 52:100–113

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Goldfried MR, Eubanks-Carter C (2004) On the need for a new psychotherapy research paradigm: comment on Westen, Novotny, and Thomspon-Brenner (2004). Psychol Bull 130:669–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Institute of Medicine (2005) Need for innovative designs in research on CAM and conventional medicine. In: Complementary and alternative medicine in the United States. Committee on the use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine by the American Public. The National Academies Press, Washington, pp 108–128

  8. Lipscomb J, Gotay C, Snyder C (2005) Introduction to outcomes assessment in cancer. In: Outcomes assessment in cancer: measures, methods, and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 3

  9. Meyer TJ, Mark MM (1995) Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Health Psychol 14:101–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ritenbaugh C (2006) Guiding concepts for whole systems research. In: Whole systems research in cancer care—report of meeting in Tromso (Sommaroy), 14–16 September 2005. Complement Ther Med 14:157–164

  11. Ritenbaugh C, Verhoef M, Fleishman S, Boon H, Leis A (2003) Whole systems research: a discipline for studying complementary and alternative medicine. Altern Ther Health Med 9:32–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shapiro SL (2001) Quality of life and breast cancer: relationship to psychosocial variables. J Clin Psychol 57:501–519

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sidani S, Epstein DR, Moritz P (2003) An alternative paradigm for clinical nursing research: an exemplar. Res Nurs Health 26:244–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Temoshok LR (2004) Rethinking research on psychosocial interventions in biopsychosocial oncology: an essay written in honor of the scholarly contributions of Bernard H. Fox. Psychooncology 13:460–467

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Thomas K, Fitter M (2002) Possible research strategies for evaluating CAM interventions. In: Lewith G, Jonas WB, Walach H (eds) Clinical research in complementary therapies. Churchill Livingstone, London, pp 59–91

    Google Scholar 

  16. Verhoef MJ, Lewith G, Ritenbaugh C, Boon H, Fleishman S, Leis A (2005) Complementary and alternative medicine whole systems research: beyond identification of inadequacies of the RCT. Complement Ther Med 13:206–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Verhoef MJ, Vanderheyden LC, Fonnebo V (2006) A whole systems research approach to cancer care: Why do we need it and how do we get started? Integr Cancer Ther 5:287–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada

    Marja Verhoef & Laura Weeks

  2. School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, 302-6190 Agronomy Road, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

    Alison Brazier

  3. Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, 107 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5E5, Canada

    Anne Leis

Authors
  1. Marja Verhoef
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Weeks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alison Brazier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne Leis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marja Verhoef.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verhoef, M., Weeks, L., Brazier, A. et al. Evaluating supportive cancer care: are we missing an opportunity?. Support Care Cancer 15, 905–907 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-007-0289-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-007-0289-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation