A summary of high quality online information resources for parents with cancer who have adolescent and young adult children: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Parents with cancer want information about maintaining family functioning despite cancer. This scoping review assesses what online information resources are available to help parents with cancer maintain family functioning, the quality of the available information, and whether resources provide specific advice for parents of adolescent and young adult (AYA) children. METHODS: To identify available relevant English-language online information resources, we imitated a parental online information search using three search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing). Online resources from the last 10 years for parents with cancer addressing family functioning were included. These resources were rated using the DISCERN instrument-a tool for rating the reliability and quality of health information resources. RESULTS: 684 results were screened and 33 online information resources from the USA, UK, Australia, Canada, and Ireland met the inclusion criteria. Average DISCERN quality was 54/80 (95% CI:50-58), which is typical for online health information. The highest rated resources provided information for parents on supporting their AYA children's needs for information and support with feelings, but few comprehensively covered other specific AYA needs. Details on resource weaknesses as identified by the DISCERN are presented. CONCLUSIONS: Several high-quality resources for parents with cancer were identified from multiple countries, allowing health professionals internationally to direct patients with cancer to relevant high quality online information. Highlighted limitations in resource quality and scope will guide future resource development and revision, ensuring more comprehensive high quality information is available to support families affected by parental cancer internationally.

Return to work after a cancer diagnosis: a meta-review of reviews and a meta-synthesis of recent qualitative studies.

PURPOSE: Returning to work (RTW) after cancer treatment can be challenging, but when desired, has many benefits. While there are many qualitative studies (reviews and recent studies) available on cancer survivors' experience of returning to work, synthesis of these qualitative studies is lacking. We aimed to summarise the existing qualitative reviews and recent studies following the last published review, to examine cancer survivors' motivations for and experiences of RTW, and to highlight factors within both the survivors and his or her environment that influence RTW. METHOD: A set of systematic reviews focusing on RTW were identified. A systematic search for individual papers published on RTW since the last review was also completed. Data extraction and bias assessment were conducted, with 25% double-coded to ensure reliability. A meta-ethnographic approach was utilised to synthesise the findings of each. RESULTS: Seven systematic reviews and 12 individual papers between 2017 and 2019 were identified. Quality was variable. Most reviews and studies focused on women with breast cancer. Three major themes were identified: person factors, employment factors and wider contextual factors including family, social and cultural variables. CONCLUSIONS: We identified gaps in research on the RTW experiences of people with cancers other than breast, men, those with low incomes and more diverse populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cancer survivors need to consider personal, employer and wider contextual factors when deciding whether and when to RTW. Future interventions to support survivors should be informed by these findings, addressing the diverse range of potential factors related to RTW in an individual survivor.

A meta-review of qualitative research on adult cancer survivors: current strengths and evidence gaps.

PURPOSE: The number of qualitative studies exploring cancer survivor experiences has significantly increased in recent years, with a large number of systematic reviews now published. This meta-review (systematic review of systematic reviews) aimed to assess the evidence base-summarising existing qualitative findings and identifying gaps for further research. METHODS: Systematic reviews published from 1950 to 2018 were identified via database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO). Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data. Review quality was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: A total of 1465 titles were retrieved, and 60 reviews were included in the final review. All included reviews were conducted between 1998 and 2018. Whilst many reviews included mixed cancer types (21), the majority included only one cancer type (breast (19), gynaecological (10), prostate (5), haematological (2), colorectal (1), bladder (1) and melanoma (1)). Reviews focused on several survivorship topic areas including quality of life, experiences of survivors from ethnic minorities, returning to work and experiences of survivorship healthcare services. Less frequently reviewed topics included fertility, body image, coping strategies and spirituality. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-review provides insight into the areas of research density and paucity. Breast and gynaecological cancer survivors are strongly represented. Gaps in synthesis include reviews for other common cancers (e.g. lung, colorectal, melanoma, haematological) as well as survivorship topic areas such as side/late effects, psychological issues, financial toxicity and health behaviours. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Qualitative research into cancer survivor experiences can guide intervention development, as well as provide survivors with insight into the experiences and challenges faced by others with cancer.