Assessment methods and services for older people with cancer in the United Kingdom

doi:10.5306/wjco.v11.i3.152

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 11, Issue 3

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Supplementary Materials of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (5349)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Tables (1-5) series.

Item

Count

PDF

277

WORD

190

HTML

2616

Tables (1-5)

261

Sum=3344

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

813

Download

1192

Sum=2005

Mar 24, 2020 (publication date) through Apr 25, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (5)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Clinical Oncology

ISSN

2218-4333

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Evidence-Based Medicine

World J Clin Oncol. Mar 24, 2020; 11(3): 152-161
Published online Mar 24, 2020. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v11.i3.152

Assessment methods and services for older people with cancer in the United Kingdom

Tania Kalsi, Danielle Harari

Tania Kalsi, Danielle Harari, Department of Ageing and Health, Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, United Kingdom

Tania Kalsi, Danielle Harari, King’s College London, Capital House, London SE1 3QD, United Kingdom

Author contributions: Kalsi T and Harari D led design of survey with the United Kingdom Geriatric Oncology Expert Reference Group contributing to iterations; Kalsi T led survey distribution and analysis of survey; Kalsi T and Harari D writing of manuscript.

Conflict-of-interest statement: There are no conflicts of interest arising from this work.

Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Corresponding author: Tania Kalsi, MBBS, MD, MRCP, Doctor, Department of Ageing and Health, 9th Floor North Wing, St Thomas' Hospital, Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7EH, United Kingdom. tania.kalsi@gstt.nhs.uk

Received: October 18, 2019
Peer-review started: October 18, 2019
First decision: November 5, 2019
Revised: December 20, 2019
Accepted: January 1, 2020
Article in press: January 1, 2020
Published online: March 24, 2020

Core Tip

Core tip: There was variability in assessment methods and access to supporting services for older people with cancer in the United Kingdom. Performance status and traditional history-taking was preferred to scoring tools. Future studies should consider moving away from scoring tools if the intention is for use in clinical practice. There was variability in access to key supporting services. Developing care pathways to better link up existing services would be helpful. Collaborative working with geriatricians appears supported. A number of questions remain. How can comprehensive geriatric assessment be feasibly embedded within cancer care pathways across a nation?