Symptom Management Guideline Implementation Among Nurses in Cancer-Specific Outpatient Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oncology outpatients experience high levels of distressing cancer-related symptoms. Nurses can provide high-quality outpatient cancer symptom management following clinical practice guideline recommendations; however, these guidelines are inconsistently used in practice. Understanding contextual factors influencing implementation is necessary to develop tailored implementation strategies. OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe (1) barriers and facilitators influencing symptom management guideline adoption, implementation, and/or sustainability among nurses in cancer-specific outpatient settings and (2) components of strategies used to enhance guideline implementation. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. CINAHL, EMBASE, EMCARE, MEDLINE, and gray literature sources were searched. Eligibility screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy informed data extraction and descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-six projects from 2004 to 2023 were included; most used quality improvement (n = 14) or quasi-experimental (n = 10) designs. Determinants were most often mapped to the "inner setting" and "individuals-roles/characteristics" Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. Most projects used multiple discrete implementation strategies within the "train and educate stakeholders" (n = 29, 85%) and/or "develop stakeholder interrelationships" (n = 20, 59%) categories. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses may face several barriers to symptom management guideline implementation within cancer-specific outpatient setting workflows and may have limited opportunity to implement guidelines within their current roles. Most projects used educational strategies, which alone may be insufficient to address reported barriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: By identifying barriers, facilitators, and strategies, this scoping review can be used to design tailored strategies to implement symptom management guidelines within outpatient oncology nursing care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.039 | 0.149 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".