Exercise oncology: an emerging discipline in the cancer care continuum

Author(s):  
GA Watson ◽  
ZL Coyne ◽  
E Houlihan ◽  
GD Leonard
2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 (44) ◽  
pp. 2-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. H. Taplin ◽  
R. Anhang Price ◽  
H. M. Edwards ◽  
M. K. Foster ◽  
E. S. Breslau ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 (44) ◽  
pp. 11-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Zapka ◽  
S. H. Taplin ◽  
P. Ganz ◽  
E. Grunfeld ◽  
K. Sterba

Immunity ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 1077-1080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth A. Helmink ◽  
Pierre-Olivier Gaudreau ◽  
Jennifer A. Wargo

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (sup1) ◽  
pp. 15-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Squiers ◽  
Lila J. Finney Rutten ◽  
Katherine Treiman ◽  
Mary Anne Bright ◽  
Bradford Hesse

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (32) ◽  
pp. 4151-4157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Chen Tina Shih ◽  
Patricia A. Ganz ◽  
Denise Aberle ◽  
Amy Abernethy ◽  
Justin Bekelman ◽  
...  

The national cost of cancer care is projected to reach $173 billion by 2020, increasing from $125 billion in 2010. This steep upward cost trajectory has placed enormous an financial burden on patients, their families, and society as a whole and raised major concern about the ability of the health care system to provide and sustain high-quality cancer care. To better understand the cost drivers of cancer care and explore approaches that will mitigate the problem, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the Institute of Medicine held a workshop entitled “Delivering Affordable Cancer Care in the 21st Century” in October 2012. Workshop participants included bioethicists, health economists, primary care physicians, and medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists, from both academic and community settings. All speakers expressed a sense of urgency about the affordability of cancer care resulting from the future demographic trend as well as the high cost of emerging cancer therapies and rapid diffusion of new technologies in the absence to evidence indicating improved outcomes for patients. This article is our summary of presentations at the workshop that highlighted the overuse and underuse of screening, treatments, and technologies throughout the cancer care continuum in oncology practice in the United States.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10101-10101
Author(s):  
Jeremy Warner ◽  
Suzanne E Maddux ◽  
Jeff Brown ◽  
John Turner Hamm ◽  
John C. Krauss ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Kalke ◽  
Tamar Ginossar ◽  
Joshua M Bentley ◽  
Hannah Carver ◽  
Sayyed Fawad Ali Shah ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Theoretically designed mobile health (mHealth) breast cancer interventions are essential for achieving positive behavior change. In the case of breast cancer, they can improve the health outcomes of millions of women by increasing prevention and care efforts. However, little is known about the theoretical underpinnings of breast cancer apps available to the general public. OBJECTIVE Given that theories may strengthen mHealth interventions, this study aimed to identify breast cancer apps designed to support behavior change, to assess the extent to which they address content along the cancer care continuum and contain behavior change techniques, and to assess the degree to which star rating is related to theory-based design. METHODS Using a criteria-based screening process, we searched 2 major app stores for breast cancer apps designed to promote behavior change. Apps were coded for content along the cancer care continuum and analyzed for behavior change techniques. The Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> test was used to examine the relationship between star ratings and the use of behavior change techniques in apps with star ratings compared to those without ratings. RESULTS The search resulted in a total of 302 apps, of which 133 were identified as containing breast cancer content. Only 9.9% (30/302) of apps supported behavior change and were further analyzed. These apps were disproportionally focused on behaviors to enhance early detection, whereas only a few apps supported care management, treatment, and posttreatment behaviors. Regarding theories, 63% (19/30) of apps customized content to users, 70% (21/30) established a health-behavior link, and 80% (24/30) provided behavior change instructions. Of the 30 apps, 15 (50%) prompted intention formation whereas less than half of the apps included goal setting (9/30, 30%) and goal reviewing (7/30, 23%). Most apps did not provide information on peer behavior (7/30, 23%) or allow for social comparison (6/30, 20%). None of the apps mobilized social norms. Only half of the apps (15/30, 50%) were user rated. The results of the Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> test showed that apps with star ratings contained significantly more behavior change techniques (median 6.00) than apps without ratings. The analysis of behavior change techniques used in apps revealed their shortcomings in the use of goal setting and social influence features. CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that commercially available breast cancer apps have not yet fully realized their potential to promote behavior change, with only a minority of apps focusing on behavior change, and even fewer including theoretical design to support behavior change along the cancer care continuum. These shortcomings are likely limiting the effectiveness of apps and their ability to improve public health. More attention needs to be paid to the involvement of professionals in app development and adherence to theories and best practices in app design to support individuals along the cancer care continuum.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16509-e16509
Author(s):  
James Edward Ward ◽  
Keith Naylor ◽  
Blase N. Polite

e16509 Background: Disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes among underrepresented racial and ethnic minority patients continue to widen. We performed, and present here, the results of a systematic review of the literature evaluating interventions to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in CRC care. Methods: The MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles that focused on interventions to reduce disparities in CRC screening, treatment, survivorship and end-of-life care from 1950 to 2010. Studies included were those that evaluated interventions in US populations that were composed of ≥50% racial/ethnic minorities (or that included a specific sub-analysis by race/ethnicity). Results: Following the electronic search, abstract and full text review, and reference reviews; a total of thirty-three studies were included in our final analysis. All of these were related to CRC screening; no studies evaluating the rest of the cancer care continuum were found. Nineteen studies (58%) were randomized controlled trials, nine (27%) were pre-test/post-test analyses, and five (15%) were cohort studies. Thirteen studies (39%) targeted African-American populations, eight (24%) targeted Hispanics, two (6%) targeted Asian populations, seven (21%) included a mixed population of ethnic minorities, and three (9%) were listed as “non-white” or included a subgroup analysis. The main results related to the magnitude of the effect of these patient-directed, patient navigator, and provider-directed interventions on CRC screening is outlined in the table below. Conclusions: Patient education involving personal contact, patient navigation services, and provider-directed education and reminder systems can modestly improve adherence to CRC screening among minority patients. Further studies targeting the rest of the colon cancer care continuum are needed. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document