Cross-sectional survey assesses information needs, patient activation, and quality of life in cancer survivors, indicating significant support requirements.
Abstract Purpose This study assessed the prevalence and type of information and support needs among European childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors (CAYACS), their socio-demographic and clinical predictors, and associations with patient activation and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods The e-QuoL Needs Study is a cross-sectional survey conducted in 15 European countries. Adult CAYACS (≥18 years, diagnosed before age 25 years) completed the modified Childhood Cancer Survivor Study–Needs Assessment Questionnaire (CCSS-NAQ), Patient Activation Measure® (PAM®), and PROMIS Global Health scales (HRQoL). Logistic and linear regression models were used to examine associations between socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, patient activation, and HRQoL. Results Overall, 571 CAYACS who completed ≥50% of the items in at least one CCSS-NAQ domain were included (71% female; 75% in the age group 18–35 years; 47% diagnosed >10 years ago). In all domains, except spirituality, most participants (62–90%) reported at least one need, with the highest prevalence found for cancer-related health information (90%), psycho-emotional consequences (87%), and health system concerns (84%). Females, survivors residing in Eastern Europe, and those with neurocognitive late effects were most likely to report needs (p<0.05). Reporting needs was associated with lower patient activation and poorer mental and physical HRQoL. Conclusions Information and support needs remain highly prevalent among European CAYACS, even long after diagnosis. Routine assessment of individual needs and targeted information strategies tailored to survivor groups identified as having higher needs may help reduce regional inequities, improve patient activation, and optimize HRQoL.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: