A research agenda for fear of cancer recurrence: A Delphi study conducted in Australia
A research agenda for fear of cancer recurrence: A Delphi study conducted in Australia
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/pon.5048
复制
发表时间：
2019-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Smith, Ben
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Butow, Phyllis;Shaw, Joanne;Smith, Ben
癌症复发恐惧（FCR）是一种常见的、令人衰弱的、对卫生系统来说代价高昂的疾病。虽然FCR相关研究的发展轨迹不断上升，但仍有许多问题没有得到解答。需要一个研究议程来澄清优先事项，并确保明智地使用研究资金和努力。本研究旨在从FCR的临床和学术专家中征集研究主题和优先事项。方法第1阶段包括通过调查从20名成员的精神肿瘤学合作研究组（PoCoG）FCR特殊兴趣小组的优先FCR研究课题的启发，随后由28名临床医生，研究人员和癌症幸存者的焦点小组讨论，在调查结果，并鼓励进一步反思。这导致了28个研究课题，然后进行了德尔菲过程，以建立共识（第2阶段）。结果31名参与者完成了德尔菲法的第一轮，23名参与者完成了第二轮，并达成了满意的共识。五个广泛的研究领域被确定为优先事项。按等级顺序，它们是（1）干预模式;（2）FCR的定义、预测因素和结果;（3）检测和筛查;（4）卫生专业人员培训;（5）覆盖特定人群。结论：希望目前的研究结果将指导FCR研究人员走向临床相关的，重要的研究，将推动该领域的发展。专家们将干预研究列为重中之重，特别是探索提供服务的最佳形式，包括阶梯式护理和结合在线或电话元素的混合模式，以增加可及性。
Objective Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is common, debilitating, and costly to the health system. While there has been a rising trajectory in FCR-related research, there remain many unanswered questions. A research agenda is required to clarify priorities and ensure that research dollars and effort are expended wisely. This study aimed to elicit research topics and priorities from clinical and academic experts in FCR. Methods Phase 1 consisted of elicitation by survey of prioritised FCR research topics from 20 members of the Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG) FCR special interest group, followed by a focus group discussion with 28 clinicians, researchers, and cancer survivors, at which survey results were presented and further reflection was encouraged. This resulted in 28 research topics that were then subjected to a Delphi process to establish consensus (phase 2). Results Thirty-one participants completed round 1 of the Delphi process and 23 round 2, after which satisfactory consensus was reached. Five broad areas of research were identified as priorities. In rank order, they were (1) intervention models; (2) definition, predictors, and outcomes of FCR; (3) detection and screening; (4) training for health professionals; and (5) reaching specific populations. Conclusions It is hoped that the current findings will guide FCR researchers towards clinically relevant, significant research that will move the field forward. Experts nominated intervention research as the top priority, specifically exploring optimal formats of delivery including stepped care and blended models incorporating online or phone elements to increase accessibility.