Strengthening support for cancer caregivers: an investigation of caregiving perceptions and informational needs

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-16

This study surveyed cancer patients and their caregivers, finding patients underestimated caregivers' experiences and both groups desired more medical, psychological, social, and practical support.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-16 · read from full text

This study surveyed unpaid cancer caregivers (N=115) and cancer patients (N=99) at a large urban cancer centre to compare perceptions of medical care and caregiver support, assess health literacy and computer proficiency, and characterize informational needs across knowledge domains. Using validated scales, the authors found that patients underestimated caregivers’ experiences and caregivers reported lower satisfaction with the medical care they received. Caregivers with higher health literacy reported lower informational needs and lower caregiver burden, and both groups expressed strong needs for medical information alongside psychological, social, and practical support. A key limitation is that the cross-sectional, one-time survey design limits causal conclusions, and the paper notes data access is restricted due to privacy/ethical constraints. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Introduction Unpaid caregivers play a key role in supporting people with cancer. However, their needs and perspectives are often overlooked, and few healthcare institutions offer dedicated support programs. To address this, we assessed and compared the perceptions and informational needs of unpaid caregivers and cancer patients. Methods Caregivers (N=115) and cancer patients (N=99) from a large urban cancer centre completed a one-time survey evaluating their perceptions of the medical care and caregiver support they had received, their informational needs, as well as their health literacy and computer proficiency. Caregivers also completed validated scales evaluating caregiver burden, preparedness, competence, and reward. We compared patients’ and caregivers’ reported perceptions and analyzed their informational needs across knowledge domains. We conducted stepwise regression to understand the relationship between participant characteristics and scores, including health literacy and caregiving burden, and their informational needs. Results Patients underestimated many aspects of caregivers’ experience, and caregivers were less satisfied than patients with the medical care received. Caregivers with higher health literacy had lower informational needs and caregiver burden. Both groups expressed a strong need for medical information in addition to psychological, social, and practical support. Conclusion These results reveal a pressing need for proactive medical and practical training for caregivers to complement psychological interventions. Furthermore, interventions to improve public health literacy may enable those who become caregivers to better navigate the challenges of their role.
Full text 3,489 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Introduction Unpaid caregivers play a key role in supporting people with cancer. However, their needs and perspectives are often overlooked, and few healthcare institutions offer dedicated support programs. To address this, we assessed and compared the perceptions and informational needs of unpaid caregivers and cancer patients.

Methods

Caregivers (N=115) and cancer patients (N=99) from a large urban cancer centre completed a one-time survey evaluating their perceptions of the medical care and caregiver support they had received, their informational needs, as well as their health literacy and computer proficiency. Caregivers also completed validated scales evaluating caregiver burden, preparedness, competence, and reward. We compared patients’ and caregivers’ reported perceptions and analyzed their informational needs across knowledge domains. We conducted stepwise regression to understand the relationship between participant characteristics and scores, including health literacy and caregiving burden, and their informational needs.

Results

Patients underestimated many aspects of caregivers’ experience, and caregivers were less satisfied than patients with the medical care received. Caregivers with higher health literacy had lower informational needs and caregiver burden. Both groups expressed a strong need for medical information in addition to psychological, social, and practical support.

Conclusion

These results reveal a pressing need for proactive medical and practical training for caregivers to complement psychological interventions. Furthermore, interventions to improve public health literacy may enable those who become caregivers to better navigate the challenges of their role. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Funding Statement This study was supported by the Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation. Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The Institutional Research Ethics Board of the University Health Network gave ethical approval for this work (REB#: 09-0952). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data Availability The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00