For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
20
views
126
references
 Top references
cited by
3
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      167
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Organisation of cancer care in troubling times: A scoping review of expert guidelines and their implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This scoping review mapped the main themes in existing expert guidelines for cancer care issued during the COVID-19 crisis from the period of March 2020-August 2021. The guidelines published during the research period principally relate to the first two waves in Europe and until the beginning of the vaccination campaign. They elaborated recommendations for cancer care reorganisation, in particular triage and quality of care issues. The article highlights the ethical, epistemological, as well as practical reasons that guidelines were not always followed to provide some lessons learned for future crises to enable better guideline development processes. We also elaborate early evidence on the impact of triage decisions and different perspectives on cancer care reorganisation from ethics and social science literature.

          Related collections

          Most cited references126

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

          Zachary Munn, Micah D J Peters, Cindy Stern … (2018)
          Background Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate. Results Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions. Conclusions Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.
          Article 0 comments Cited 2042 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Frontline nurses’ burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear statuses and their associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China: A large-scale cross-sectional study

            Deying Hu, Yue Kong, Wengang Li … (2020)
            Background During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, frontline nurses face enormous mental health challenges. Epidemiological data on the mental health statuses of frontline nurses are still limited. The aim of this study was to examine mental health (burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear) and their associated factors among frontline nurses who were caring for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China. Methods A large-scale cross-sectional, descriptive, correlational study design was used. A total of 2,014 eligible frontline nurses from two hospitals in Wuhan, China, participated in the study. Besides sociodemographic and background data, a set of valid and reliable instruments were used to measure outcomes of burnout, anxiety, depression, fear, skin lesion, self-efficacy, resilience, and social support via the online survey in February 2020. Findings On average, the participants had a moderate level of burnout and a high level of fear. About half of the nurses reported moderate and high work burnout, as shown in emotional exhaustion (n = 1,218, 60.5%), depersonalization (n = 853, 42.3%), and personal accomplishment (n = 1,219, 60.6%). The findings showed that 288 (14.3%), 217 (10.7%), and 1,837 (91.2%) nurses reported moderate and high levels of anxiety, depression, and fear, respectively. The majority of the nurses (n = 1,910, 94.8%) had one or more skin lesions, and 1,950 (96.8%) nurses expressed their frontline work willingness. Mental health outcomes were statistically positively correlated with skin lesion and negatively correlated with self-efficacy, resilience, social support, and frontline work willingness. Interpretation The frontline nurses experienced a variety of mental health challenges, especially burnout and fear, which warrant attention and support from policymakers. Future interventions at the national and organisational levels are needed to improve mental health during this pandemic by preventing and managing skin lesions, building self-efficacy and resilience, providing sufficient social support, and ensuring frontline work willingness.
            Article 0 comments Cited 327 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Fear of Covid‐19, psychological distress, work satisfaction and turnover intention among frontline nurses

              Leodoro J. Labrague, Janet Alexis A. De Los Santos (2020)
              Abstract Aim To examine the relative influence of fear of COVID‐19 on nurses’ psychological distress, work satisfaction and intent to leave their organisation and the profession. Background The emergence of COVID‐19 has significantly impacted the psychological and mental well‐being of frontline healthcare workers, including nurses. To date, no studies have been conducted examining how this fear of COVID‐19 contributes to health, well‐being and work outcomes in frontline nurses. Methods This is a cross‐sectional research design involving 261 frontline nurses in the Philippines. Five standardised scales were used for data collection. Results Overall, the composite score of the fear of COVID‐19 scale was 19.92. Job role and attendance of COVID‐19‐related training predicted fear of COVID‐19. An increased level of fear of COVID‐19 was associated with decreased job satisfaction, increased psychological distress, and increased organisational and professional turnover intentions. Conclusions Frontline nurses who reported not having attended COVID‐19‐related training and those who held part‐time job roles reported increased fears of COVID‐19. Addressing the fear of COVID‐19 may result in improved job outcomes in frontline nurses, such as increased job satisfaction, decreased stress levels and lower intent to leave the organisation and the profession. Implications for Nursing Management Organisational measures are vital to support the mental health of nurses and address their fear of COVID‐19 through peer and social support, psychological and mental support services (e.g., counselling or psychotherapy), provision of training related to COVID‐19, and accurate and regular information updates.
              Article 0 comments Cited 272 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Crit Rev Oncol Hematol
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Crit Rev Oncol Hematol
                Title: Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
                Publisher: Published by Elsevier B.V.
                ISSN (Print): 1040-8428
                ISSN (Electronic): 1879-0461
                Publication date PMC-release: 23 March 2022
                Publication date (Print): May 2022
                Publication date (Electronic): 23 March 2022
                Volume: 173
                Page: 103656
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Social Sciences and Humanities, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
                [b ]International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France
                [c ]Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
                [d ]Univ Lyon, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University, INSERM 1052, CNRS 5286, Centre Léon Bérard, Cancer Research Center of Lyon, Lyon, France
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Department of Social Sciences and Humanities, Centre Léon Bérard, 28 Prom. Léa et Napoléon Bullukian, 69008 Lyon, France.
                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S1040-8428(22)00080-4 Publisher ID: 103656
                DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103656
                PMC ID: 8942466
                PubMed ID: 35337970
                SO-VID: ffb9a827-438e-41e5-afa1-46e37308a53b
                Copyright © © 2022 Published by Elsevier B.V.
                License:

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Date received : 27 December 2021
                Date revision received : 15 March 2022
                Date accepted : 18 March 2022
                Categories
                Subject: Article

                Keywords: covid-19,cancer,triage,guidelines,recommendations,person-centered care,quality care,ethics
                Data availability:
                Keywords: covid-19, cancer, triage, guidelines, recommendations, person-centered care, quality care, ethics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content167

                See all similar

                Cited by3

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors2,140

                See all reference authors