Purpose This study aims to understand parents’ experiences of school integration support for their child’s transition to K-12 schooling during or after cancer treatment. Methods This integrative literature review used PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase databases and included articles from January 2000 to July 2022 describing parent experiences with support from healthcare providers, school faculty/systems, and school integration programs. This review was guided by an adapted School Re-Entry Model and used constant comparison to identify common themes and guide synthesis. The Johns Hopkins Evidence and Quality Guide was used to appraise article quality and level of evidence. Results Thirty-five articles were included in the final review: seventeen qualitative, fourteen quantitative, and four mixed or multi-method designs. Parents reported experiences receiving support from healthcare providers, school faculty/systems, school integration programs, and “other” sources. Parents reported both facilitators and barriers to communication, knowledge, and the process of receiving school integration support. Conclusions Parents found neuro/psychologists highly supportive but reported limited support from other healthcare providers. Most parents reported mixed experiences with school faculty and reported many barriers to school system support. Parents reported positive experiences with school integration programs; however, limited programs were available. Implications for Cancer Survivors Future programs and research should focus on addressing identified barriers and facilitators of school integration support. Further work is also needed to understand a wider range of parent experiences during school integration. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11764-022-01276-y.

Purpose The optimal delivery of survivorship care, particularly within primary care, remains poorly understood. We established the Johns Hopkins Primary Care for Cancer Survivors (PCCS) clinic in 2015 to address care challenges unique to cancer survivors. To better understand the care from the PCCS clinic, we interviewed patients about their perception of care delivery, survivorship care, and care coordination. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with adult survivors of any cancer type seen in the PCCS clinic. A priori and in vivo coding of verbatim transcripts was part of the thematic analysis. Results Seventeen cancer survivors were interviewed (ages 37–78). Themes that emerged were (1) optimal care and (2) the PCCS experience. Subthemes respectively included the ideal role of the primary care provider (1), telehealth/COVID-19 challenges and opportunities (1), patient-derived value from the PCCS clinic (2), and improving the PCCS model (2). Overall, PCCS patients expected and experienced high-quality, comprehensive primary care by providers with cancer survivorship expertise. Patients reported telehealth benefits and challenges for survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions PCCS patients perceived receiving high-quality primary care and valued being seen in a primary care–based survivorship clinic. The PCCS clinic can serve as a model of primary care–based cancer survivorship. Implications for Cancer Survivors Ideal primary care provider roles and care coordination are important factors for high-quality survivorship care and can be provided by a specialized cancer survivorship clinic in primary care. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11764-022-01166-3.

IntroductionDelaying cancer treatment following diagnosis impacts health outcomes, including increasing patient distress and odds of mortality. Interventions to promote timely healthcare engagement may decrease patient-reported stress and improve quality of life. Community health workers (CHWs) represent an enabling resource for reducing delays in attending initial oncology treatment visits. As part of an ongoing programme evaluation coordinated by the Merck Foundation, we will implement a pilot navigation programme comprising CHW-conducted needs assessments for supporting patients and their caregivers. We aim to investigate (1) the programme’s influence on patients’ healthcare utilisation within the period between their first diagnosis and initial treatment visit and (2) the logistic feasibility and acceptability of programme implementation.Methods and analysisWe will employ a hybrid implementation design to introduce the CHW navigation programme at the Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center. CHW team members will use a consecutive sampling approach. Participants will complete the Problem-Checklist, Chronic Illness Distress Scale and the Satisfaction with Life Domains instruments. CHWs will provide tailored guidance by sharing information available on the Johns Hopkins Electronic Resource databases. The investigators will evaluate patients’ time to initial oncology treatment and healthcare utilisation by reviewing electronic medical records at 3 and 6 months postintervention. Bivariate analyses will be completed to evaluate the relationships between receiving the programme and all outcome measures.Ethics and disseminationThis study’s protocol was approved by the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine’s institutional review board (IRB00160610). Informed consent will be obtained by phone by the CHW navigator. Dissemination planning is ongoing through regular meetings between members of the investigator team and public members of two community advisory groups. Study plans include collaborating with other experts from the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity for ideating dissemination strategies.