Dr Liz Fradgley

Dr Liz Fradgley

Research Associate

School of Medicine and Public Health

Career Summary

Biography

Dr Elizabeth Fradgley received her PhD (Behavioural Sciences in Relation to Medicine) in 2016 from the University of Newcastle. She also completed a Bachelor of Health Sciences (Honours with Distinction) at the University of Calgary. 

As a behavioural scientist, Dr Fradgley has made significant contributions to understanding and promoting the delivery of patient-centred care with recent publications exploring how patients can be involved in evaluating and redesigning health services. Her thesis included developing a web-based survey tool that empowers individuals with chronic diseases to systematically evaluate their experiences of care and generate comprehensive and personalised summaries of their priorities and preferences for quality improvement. For this work and volunteer contributions, she was a finalist for NSW International Student of Year in 2014.  

Dr Fradgley has an outstanding record relative to opportunity including a rapidly increasing publication trajectory with 18 peer-reviewed papers (11 in the last 2 years, lead author on 7) and 8 currently under review. All publications are within the top quartile (Scimago Journal Ranking) of health policy and service journals demonstrating high-quality outputs. She is cited over 40 times, including by the World Health Organization. She submitted 2 invited commentaries including an article for the Hunter Cancer Research Alliance's Emerging Researchers Edition (2013).

Dr Fradgley has attracted over $450000 in competitive research funding including a NHMRC partnership grant and 2 commissioned studies. She presented at 5 national and 2 international conferences and in 2017, she will deliver 3 invited seminars. In recognition of her contribution, she received: Best Student Oral Presentation, Translational Research in Cancer Conference (2013); International Postgraduate Scholarship (2012); and, HMRI’s ECR of the Year short-list finalist (2016). 


Qualifications

  • Doctor of Philosophy, University of Newcastle
  • Bachelor of Health Sciences (Honours), University of Calgary - Canada

Keywords

  • Health behaviour
  • Health services research
  • Implementation science
  • Multidisciplinary care
  • Patient-centred care
  • Psycho-oncology
  • Supportive care

Languages

  • French (Fluent)
  • English (Mother)

Fields of Research

Code Description Percentage
111708 Health and Community Services 45
170110 Psychological Methodology, Design and Analysis 20
111299 Oncology and Carcinogenesis not elsewhere classified 35

Professional Experience

Academic appointment

Dates Title Organisation / Department
15/02/2016 -  Postdoctoral Research Associate

Dr Fradgley is a postdoctoral researcher within the University of Newcastle's Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour. She is currently responsible for the daily management of a national randomised controlled trial, and is leading a national audit of distress management practices in Australian cancer services. 

The University of Newcastle, Australia
Australia

Professional appointment

Dates Title Organisation / Department
27/02/2012 - 15/02/2016 Research Assistant The University of Newcastle - Faculty of Health and Medicine
Australia
Edit

Publications

For publications that are currently unpublished or in-press, details are shown in italics.


Journal article (14 outputs)

Year Citation Altmetrics Link
2016 Bryant J, Sanson-Fisher R, Fradgley E, Hobden B, Zucca A, Henskens F, et al., 'A consumer register: an acceptable and cost-effective alternative for accessing patient populations', BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16 1-10 (2016) [C1]

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Population-based registries are increasingly used to recruit patient samples for research, however, they have several limitations including low ... [more]

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Population-based registries are increasingly used to recruit patient samples for research, however, they have several limitations including low consent and participation rates, and potential selection bias. To improve access to samples for research, the utility of a new model of recruitment termed the 'Consumer Register', that allows for direct patient recruitment from hospitals, was examined. This paper reports: (i) consent rates onto the register; (ii) preferred methods and frequency of contact; and (iii) the feasibility of establishing the register, including: (a) cost per person recruited to the register; (b) the differential cost and consent rates of volunteer versus paid data collectors; and (c) participant completion rates. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in five outpatient clinics in Australia. Patients were approached by volunteers or paid data collectors and asked to complete a touch-screen electronic survey. Consenting individuals were asked to indicate their willingness and preferences for enrolment onto a research register. Descriptive statistics were used to examine patient preferences and linear regression used to model the success of volunteer versus paid data collectors. The opportunity and financial costs of establishing the register were calculated. Results: A total of 1947 patients (80.6 %) consented to complete the survey, of which, 1486 (76.3 %) completed the questionnaire. Of the completers, the majority (69.4 %, or 1032 participants) were willing to be listed on the register and preferred to be contacted by email (50.3 %). Almost 39 % of completers were willing to be contacted three or more times in a 12 month period. The annual opportunity cost of resources consumed by the register was valued at $37,187, giving an opportunity cost per person recruited to the register of $36. After amortising fixed costs, the annual financial outlay was $23,004 or $22 per person recruited to the register. Use of volunteer data collectors contributed to an annual saving of $14,183, however paid data collectors achieved significantly higher consent rates. Successful enrolment onto the register was completed for 42 % of the sample. Conclusions: A Consumer Register is a promising and feasible alternative to population-based registries, with the majority of participants willing to be contacted multiple times via low-resource methods such as email. There is an effectiveness/cost trade off in the use of paid versus volunteer data collectors.

DOI 10.1186/s12874-016-0238-8
Citations Scopus - 1Web of Science - 1
Co-authors Frans Henskens, Alison Zucca, Rob Sanson-Fisher, Christopher Oldmeadow
2016 Paul CL, Boyes AW, O'Brien L, Baker AL, Henskens FA, Roos I, et al., 'Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Proactive Web-Based Versus Telephone-Based Information and Support: Can Electronic Platforms Deliver Effective Care for Lung Cancer Patients?', JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS, 5 (2016)
DOI 10.2196/resprot.6248
Co-authors Amanda Baker, Chris Paul, Frans Henskens, Tara Clinton-Mcharg, Allison Boyes
2016 Fradgley EA, Paul CL, Bryant J, Oldmeadow C, 'Getting right to the point: Identifying Australian outpatients' priorities and preferences for patient-centred quality improvement in chronic disease care', International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 28 470-477 (2016) [C1]

© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. Objectives: To identify spe... [more]

© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. Objectives: To identify specific actions for patient-centred quality improvement in chronic disease outpatient settings, this study identified patients' general and specific preferences among a comprehensive suite of initiatives for change.Design and setting: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in three hospital-based clinics specializing in oncology, neurology and cardiology care located in New South Wales, Australia.Participants and measures: Adult English-speaking outpatients completed the touch-screen Consumer Preferences Survey in waiting rooms or treatment areas. Participants selected up to 23 general initiatives that would improve their experience. Using adaptive branching, participants could select an additional 110 detailed initiatives and complete a relative prioritization exercise.Results: A total of 541 individuals completed the survey (71.1% consent, 73.1% completion). Commonly selected general initiatives, presented in order of decreasing priority (along with sample proportion), included: improved parking (60.3%), up-to-date information provision (15.0%), ease of clinic contact (12.9%), a ccess to information at home (12.8%), convenient appointment scheduling (14.2%), reduced wait-times (19.8%) and information on medical emergencies (11.1%). To address these general initiatives, 40 detailed initiatives were selected by respondents.Conclusions: Initiatives targeting service accessibility and information provision, such as parking and up-to-date information on patient prognoses and progress, were commonly selected and perceived to be of relatively greater priority. Specific preferences included the need for clinics to provide patient-designated parking in close proximity to the clinic, information on treatment progress and test results (potentially in the form of designated brief appointments or via telehealth) and comprehensive and trustworthy lists of information sources to access at home.

DOI 10.1093/intqhc/mzw049
Citations Web of Science - 1
Co-authors Christopher Oldmeadow, Chris Paul
2016 Fradgley EA, Paul CL, Bryant J, Collins N, Ackland SP, Bellamy D, Levi CR, 'Collaborative Patient-Centered Quality Improvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey Comparing the Types and Numbers of Quality Initiatives Selected by Patients and Health Professionals.', Eval Health Prof, 39 475-495 (2016) [C1]
DOI 10.1177/0163278716659524
Co-authors Chris Paul, Christopher Levi, Stephen Ackland
2016 Fradgley EA, Bryant J, Paul CL, Hall AE, Sanson-Fisher RW, Oldmeadow C, 'Cross-sectional data that explore the relationship between outpatients' quality of life and preferences for quality improvement in oncology settings', Journal of Oncology Practice, 12 e746-e754 (2016) [C1]

Copyright © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology. Purpose This cross-sectional study assessed the association between oncology outpatients' quality improvement pref... [more]

Copyright © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology. Purpose This cross-sectional study assessed the association between oncology outpatients' quality improvement preferences and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Implementation of specific initiatives preferred by patients with lower HRQoL may be a strategic approach to enhancing care for potentially vulnerable patients. Methods English-speaking adults were recruited from five outpatient chemotherapy clinics located in New South Wales, Australia. Using touch screen devices, participants selected up to 25 initiatives that would improve their experiences and completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) survey. The logistic odds of selecting an initiative according to FACT-G scores were calculated to determine whether preferences were associated with HRQoL after controlling for potential confounders. Results Of the 411 eligible outpatients approached to participate, 263 (64%) completed surveys. Commonly selected initiatives were up-to-date information on treatment and condition progress (19.8%), access to or information on financial assistance (18.3%), and reduced clinic wait times (17.5%). For those with relatively lower FACT-G scores, the adjusted odds of selecting five initiatives illustrated an increasing trend: convenient appointment scheduling systems (+23% [P =.002]), reduced wait times (+15% [P =.01] ), information on medical emergencies (+14% [P =.04]), access to or information on financial assistance (+15% [P =.009] ), help to maintain daily living activities (+18% [P =.007]). Conclusion Two areas of improvement were commonly selected: easily accessible health services and information and support for self-management. Although the results suggest an association between a few quality improvement preferences and HRQoL, a wider spectrum of patient characteristics must be considered when targeting quality improvement to patient subgroups.

DOI 10.1200/JOP.2016.011023
Co-authors Chris Paul, Rob Sanson-Fisher, Christopher Oldmeadow, Alix Hall
2016 Paul C, Bonevski B, Twyman L, D'Este C, Siahpush M, Guillaumier A, et al., 'The 'price signal' for health care is loud and clear: A cross-sectional study of self-reported access to health care by disadvantaged Australians', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 40 132-137 (2016) [C1]

© 2015 Public Health Association of Australia. Objective: To describe self-reported inability to access health care and factors associated with lack of access among a socioeconom... [more]

© 2015 Public Health Association of Australia. Objective: To describe self-reported inability to access health care and factors associated with lack of access among a socioeconomically disadvantaged group. Method: A cross-sectional survey with 906 adult clients of a large community welfare agency in New South Wales. Clients attending the service for emergency assistance completed a touchscreen survey. Results: Inability to access health care in the prior year was reported by more than one-third of the sample (38%), compared to the 5% found for the general population. Dentists (47%), specialists (43%) or GPs (29%) were the least accessible types of health care. The main reason for inability to access health care was cost, accounting for 60% of responses. Almost half (47%) the sample reported delayed or non-use of medicines due to cost. Increasing financial stress was associated with increased inability to access GP or specialist care, medicines and imaging. Higher anxiety scores were associated with inability to access health care, and with cost-related inability to access medicines and imaging. Conclusion: For disadvantaged groups, cost-related barriers to accessing care are prominent and are disproportionately high - particularly regarding dentistry, specialist and GP care. Implications: Improvements in health outcomes for disadvantaged groups are likely to require strategies to reduce cost-related barriers to health care.

DOI 10.1111/1753-6405.12405
Citations Scopus - 1Web of Science - 2
Co-authors Billie Bonevski, Catherine Deste, Chris Paul
2015 Zucca A, Sanson-Fisher R, Waller A, Carey M, Fradgley E, Regan T, 'Medical Oncology Patients: Are They Offered Help and Does It Provide Relief?', Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 50 436-444 (2015) [C1]

© 2015 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Context Identifying modifiable gaps in the symptom management pathway, as perceived by patients, is the first step to ... [more]

© 2015 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Context Identifying modifiable gaps in the symptom management pathway, as perceived by patients, is the first step to relieving patient suffering. Objectives The objective is to describe the proportion of patients experiencing treatable cancer-related symptoms who reported 1) a health care provider at the treatment center offered assistance for their symptom, 2) they accepted the assistance offered, and 3) the assistance relieved suffering. Variation in symptom management among treatment centers also was examined. Methods A survey was done with 528 medical oncology outpatients recruited from six treatment centers. Eight items explored management of prevalent, burdensome, and treatable cancer-related symptoms: pain, fatigue, other physical side effects, and emotional distress. Participants were asked about symptom management provided at the clinic from where they were recruited. Questions referred to the last occasion the patient experienced the symptom. Results Fewer patients were offered help to relieve fatigue (44%) and emotional distress (57%), than pain (90%) and other physical side effects (84%). In most cases, help was not offered as clinic staff were not aware of the patient's symptom. Although the vast majority of patients accepted the help that was offered, more patients accepted help for physical symptoms (pain, 97%; fatigue, 95%; and other side effects, 98%) than emotional symptoms (87%). When care was provided, most patients experienced at least a little relief from pain (99%), fatigue (94%), and emotional distress (96%). Symptom management did not vary significantly by treatment center (P = 0.073). Conclusion Quality improvement initiatives must focus primarily on improving providers' awareness of their patients' symptoms and ensuring that patients are subsequently offered help.

DOI 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.04.018
Citations Scopus - 3Web of Science - 3
Co-authors Alison Zucca, Timothy Regan, Amy Waller, Mariko Carey, Rob Sanson-Fisher
2015 Fradgley EA, Paul CL, Bryant J, 'A systematic review of barriers to optimal outpatient specialist services for individuals with prevalent chronic diseases: What are the unique and common barriers experienced by patients in high income countries?', International Journal for Equity in Health, 14 (2015) [C1]

© 2015 Fradgley et al. Health utilization and need assessment data suggest there is considerable variation in access to outpatient specialist care. However, it is unclear if the ... [more]

© 2015 Fradgley et al. Health utilization and need assessment data suggest there is considerable variation in access to outpatient specialist care. However, it is unclear if the types of barriers experienced are specific to chronic disease groups or experienced universally. This systematic review provides a detailed summary of common and unique barriers experienced by chronic disease groups when accessing and receiving care, and a synthesized list of possible health service initiatives to improve equitable delivery of optimal care in high-income countries. Quantitative articles describing barriers to specialist outpatient services were retrieved from CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PyscINFO. To be eligible for review, studies: were published from 2002 to May 2014; included samples with cancer, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, arthritis, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, asthma, chronic pulmonary disorder (COPD) or depression; and, were conducted in high-income countries. Using a previously validated model of access (Penchansky and Thomas' model of fit), barriers were grouped according to five overarching domains and defined in more detail using 33 medical subject headings. Results from reviewed articles, including the scope and frequency of reported barriers, are conceptualized using thematic analysis and framed as possible health service initiatives. A total of 3181 unique records were screened for eligibility, of which 74 studies were included in final analysis. The largest proportion of studies reported acceptability barriers (75.7 %), of which demographic disparities (44.6 %) were reported across all diseases. Other frequently reported barriers included inadequate need assessment (25.7 %), information provision (32.4 %), or health communication (20 %). Unique barriers were identified for oncology, mental health, and COPD samples. Based on the scope, frequency and measurement of reported barriers, eight key themes with associated implications for health services are presented. Examples include: common accommodation and accessibility barriers caused on service organization or physical structure, such as parking and appointment scheduling; common barriers created by poor coordination of care within the healthcare team; and unique barriers resulting from inadequate need assessment and referral practices. Consideration of barriers, across and within chronic diseases, suggests a number of specific initiatives are likely to improve the delivery of patient-centered care and increase equity in access to high-quality health services.

DOI 10.1186/s12939-015-0179-6
Citations Scopus - 9Web of Science - 8
Co-authors Chris Paul
2015 Bryant J, Sanson-Fisher R, Fradgley E, Regan T, Hobden B, Ackland SP, 'Oncology patients overwhelmingly support tissue banking.', BMC Cancer, 15 413 (2015) [C1]
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1416-5
Citations Scopus - 4Web of Science - 4
Co-authors Stephen Ackland, Timothy Regan, Rob Sanson-Fisher
2015 Tzelepis F, Sanson-Fisher RW, Zucca AC, Fradgley EA, 'Measuring the quality of patient-centered care: Why patient-reported measures are critical to reliable assessment', Patient Preference and Adherence, 9 831-835 (2015) [C1]

© 2015 Tzelepis et al. Purpose: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) identified patient-centeredness as crucial to quality health care. The IOM endorsed six patient-centeredness dimen... [more]

© 2015 Tzelepis et al. Purpose: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) identified patient-centeredness as crucial to quality health care. The IOM endorsed six patient-centeredness dimensions that stipulated that care must be: respectful to patients¿ values, preferences, and expressed needs; coordinated and integrated; provide information, communication, and education; ensure physical comfort; provide emotional support; and involve family and friends. Patient-reported measures examine the patient¿s perspective and are essential to the accurate assessment of patient-centered care. This article¿s objectives are to: 1) use the six IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimensions as a framework to outline why patient-reported measures are crucial to the reliable measurement of patient-centered care; and 2) to identify existing patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centered care dimension. Methods: For each IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimension, the published literature was searched to highlight the essential role of patients in assessing patient-centered care and informing quality improvement efforts. Existing literature was also searched to identify examples of patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centeredness dimension. Conclusion: Patient-reported measures are arguably the best way to measure patient-centeredness. For instance, patients are best positioned to determine whether care aligns with patient values, preferences, and needs and the Measure of Patient Preferences is an example of a patient-reported measure that does so. Furthermore, only the patient knows whether they received the level of information desired, and if information was understood and can be recalled. Patient-reported measures that examine information provision include the Lung Information Needs Questionnaire and the EORTC QLQ-INFO25. In relation to physical comfort, only patients can report the severity of physical symptoms and whether medications provide adequate relief. Patient-reported measures that investigate physical comfort include the Pain Care Quality Survey and the Brief Pain Inventory. Using patient-reported measures to regularly measure patient-centered care is critical to identifying areas of health care where improvements are needed.

DOI 10.2147/PPA.S81975
Citations Scopus - 7Web of Science - 7
Co-authors Rob Sanson-Fisher, Flora Tzelepis, Alison Zucca
2014 Yergens D, Fradgley E, Aiyar R, Lang E, Rowe BH, Ghali WA, 'An environmental scan of medical assessment units in Canada.', Healthc Q, 17 28-33 (2014) [C2]
Citations Scopus - 1
2014 Fradgley EA, Paul CL, Bryant J, Roos IA, Henskens FA, Paul DJ, 'Consumer participation in quality improvements for chronic disease care: development and evaluation of an interactive patient-centered survey to identify preferred service initiatives.', Journal of medical Internet research, 16 e292 (2014) [C1]
DOI 10.2196/jmir.3545
Citations Scopus - 6
Co-authors Chris Paul, Frans Henskens
2012 Fradgley EA, Ma I, Bacchus M, Glow J, Brass C, Fisher M, et al., 'Implementation of a Comprehensive Procedural Skills Examination for Internal Medicine at the University of Calgary: A Descriptive Report', Canadian Journal of General Internal Medicine, 4 120-121 (2012)
2011 Ngwakongnwi E, Fradgley E, Quan H, Lu M, Cawthorpe D, 'Referrals, language proficiency, and enrolment for children's mental health services', CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW, 33 1994-1998 (2011)
DOI 10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.05.030
Show 11 more journal articles

Conference (9 outputs)

Year Citation Altmetrics Link
2016 Fradgley E, Byrnes E, Paul C, Carter G, Jacobsen P, Ben B, et al., 'QUANTIFYING THE UPTAKE OF DISTRESS SCREENING AND MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES IN AUSTRALIAN CANCER SERVICES: A PROTOCOL FOR A NATIONAL CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY', ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY (2016)
Co-authors Gregory Carter, Chris Paul
2015 Fradgley E, Paul C, Bryant J, Oldmeadow C, 'AIMING FOR THE RIGHT QUALITY IMPROVEMENT TARGET: CROSS-SECTIONAL DATA EXPLORING OUTPATIENTS' PRIORITIES AND PREFERENCES FOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN TERTIARY CLINICS', ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY (2015) [E3]
Co-authors Christopher Oldmeadow, Chris Paul
2015 Fradgley E, Paul C, Bryant J, Collins N, Ackland S, Bellamy D, Levi C, 'ADVANCING COLLABORATIVE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN TERTIARY SETTINGS: DO CHRONIC DISEASE OUTPATIENTS AND HEALTH PROFESSIONALS IDENTIFY SIMILAR TYPES AND NUMBERS OF QUALITY INITIATIVES?', ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY (2015) [E3]
Co-authors Stephen Ackland, Christopher Levi, Chris Paul
2014 Henskens FA, Paul DJ, Wallis M, Bryant J, Carey M, Fradgley E, et al., 'Web-based support for population-based medical research: Presenting the QuON survey system', HEALTHINF 2014 - 7th International Conference on Health Informatics, Proceedings; Part of 7th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies, BIOSTEC 2014 (2014) [E1]

This paper discusses the needs of medical researchers working in the area of patient-centred medicine, in particular their use of survey data in measuring patient opinions, needs,... [more]

This paper discusses the needs of medical researchers working in the area of patient-centred medicine, in particular their use of survey data in measuring patient opinions, needs, perceived quality of care received, and priorities of health service interventions. Until quite recently, collection of survey data has been either paper-based, or achieved using computer software that largely duplicated paper-based processes with limited additional functionality. The authors investigate the use of web-based technology to support collection of such data from patients, including experiences and observations on enhanced/additional functionality made possible by its adoption. A novel software design termed QuON is presented, together with examples of its capabilities and uses in current research projects. Copyright © 2014 SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications. All rights reserved.

Citations Scopus - 2
Co-authors Rob Sanson-Fisher, Alison Zucca, Mark Wallis, Mariko Carey, Chris Paul, Frans Henskens
2014 Henskens FA, Paul DJ, Wallis M, Bryant J, Carey M, Fradgley E, et al., 'How Do Health Researchers Benefit From Web-Based Survey Systems?', Proceedings of e-Health 2014 (2014) [E1]
Citations Scopus - 1
Co-authors Frans Henskens, Chris Paul, Mark Wallis, Mariko Carey, Alison Zucca, Rob Sanson-Fisher
2014 Fradgley E, Paul C, Bryant J, Zucca A, 'A Multi-site Study to Explore Patient-identified and Prioritized Health Service Initiatives to Improve Oncology Outpatient Care: Are We Aiming for the Right Targets?', PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY (2014) [E3]
Co-authors Chris Paul, Alison Zucca
2014 Fradgley E, Paul C, Bryant J, Roos I, 'Optimising New Technologies to Enable Consumer Participation in Quality Improvements for Oncology Care: Development and Evaluation of an Interactive Survey of Preferences and Priorities', PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY (2014) [E3]
Co-authors Chris Paul
2014 Bryant J, Sanson-Fisher R, Fradgley L, Regan T, Hobden B, Ackland S, Turon H, 'ONCOLOGY PATIENTS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT TISSUE BANKING', ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY (2014) [E3]
Citations Web of Science - 1
Co-authors Stephen Ackland, Timothy Regan, Rob Sanson-Fisher
2009 Ngwakongnwi E, Fradgley E, Cawthorpe D, Quan H, 'ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PREFERRED LANGUAGE OF SERVICE AND ENROLMENT FOR CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES', AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY (2009) [E3]
Show 6 more conferences
Edit

Grants and Funding

Summary

Number of grants 3
Total funding $501,435

Click on a grant title below to expand the full details for that specific grant.


20171 grants / $24,866

A scoping review of the current state of health services research in Australia$24,866

Funding body: Health Services Research Association of Australia and New Zealand

Funding body Health Services Research Association of Australia and New Zealand
Project Team Associate Professor Christine Paul, Professor John Wiggers, Professor Deb Loxton, Doctor Catherine Chojenta, Doctor Melissa Harris, Doctor Liz Fradgley
Scheme Research Grant
Role Investigator
Funding Start 2017
Funding Finish 2017
GNo G1601330
Type Of Funding Grant - Aust Non Government
Category 3AFG
UON Y

20162 grants / $476,569

A randomised trial to implement systematic distress screening and structured care for callers using Cancer Councils' telephone services$446,774

Distress can interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its symptoms and treatment. Guidelines for distress management recommend pathways of support or structured care based on testing for distress; more simply, individuals should be asked standardised questions about their distress and then be matched with the services able to help with mild, moderate or severe distress. Structured care models have not been tested in community-based services like the Cancer Council 13 11 20 telephone service which provides support for people affected by cancer. The 13 11 20 service is staffed by trained consultants who can offer callers a wide range of services which provide informational, instrumental and emotional support. This randomised trial will assess the effectiveness of a structured care model in improving callers’ use of offered services and reducing levels of distress. 

Funding body: National Health and Medical Research Council

Funding body National Health and Medical Research Council
Project Team

A/Prof Christine Paul, Dr Allison Boyes, Prof Paul Jacobsen, Ms Lorna O'Brien, Dr Tara Clinton-Mcharg, Dr Anna Boltong, Dr Elizabeth Fradgley, Ms Katherine Lane

Scheme Project Grant
Role Investigator
Funding Start 2016
Funding Finish 2019
GNo
Type Of Funding Aust Competitive - Commonwealth
Category 1CS
UON N

Quantifying and addressing the evidence-practice gap in distress screening: a national environmental scan and short pilot-test to determine improvement areas and acceptability of implementation strategies for Australian cancer services.$29,795

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) defines distress as a multifactorial unpleasant emotional experience of a psychological, social and/or spiritual nature that may interfere with an individual’s ability to cope with a cancer diagnosis, symptoms and treatment. Up to 45% of patients will experience distress during their cancer journey, which if left untreated, can be associated with the development of clinically significant disorders such as depression and anxiety. Distressed cancer patients are more likely to report lower quality of life with relatively worse survival rates, decreased treatment compliance, and longer length of hospital stays.

Due to the complex and evolving nature of distress, health professionals often fail to detect distress in time- or resource-poor clinical settings. Distress screening is the standardised assessment of patients with the intent to inform referral decisions, specifically if more extensive assessment and psychosocial support services are warranted. There are limited data about the extent to which Australian cancer services have implemented distress-screening guidelines.

This project will identify: (1) the proportion of cancer services who adhere to evidence-based guidelines; (2) potential areas of improvement (i.e. use of validated screening measure, timing of screening, or referral protocols based on distress); (3) barriers and facilitators to implementing distress screening (including lack of care options for identified cases); and (4) whether quality improvement techniques, such as mentoring and bench-marking, are acceptable to services who wish to improve screening rates. 

Funding body: Hunter Cancer Research Alliance (HCRA)

Funding body Hunter Cancer Research Alliance (HCRA)
Project Team

Dr Elizabeth Fradgley, A/Prof Christine Paul, Dr Greg Carter, Prof Paul Jacobsen, Dr Ben Britton, Dr Kerrie Clover, Mr Douglas Bellamy, Dr Kristen McCarter, Ms Martine Cox

Scheme HCRA Implementation Flagship program
Role Lead
Funding Start 2016
Funding Finish 2018
GNo
Type Of Funding Internal
Category INTE
UON N
Edit

Research Supervision

Number of supervisions

Completed0
Current1

Total current UON EFTSL

PhD0.3

Current Supervision

Commenced Level of Study Research Title Program Supervisor Type
2017 PhD A randomised Trial to Evaluate Standardised Distress Screening and Structured Care in the Cancer Council Cancer Information and Support Telephone Services. PhD (Behavioural Science), Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle Co-Supervisor
Edit

Research Collaborations

The map is a representation of a researchers co-authorship with collaborators across the globe. The map displays the number of publications against a country, where there is at least one co-author based in that country. Data is sourced from the University of Newcastle research publication management system (NURO) and may not fully represent the authors complete body of work.

Country Count of Publications
Australia 20
Canada 3
United States 3
United Kingdom 2
Edit

Dr Liz Fradgley

Position

Research Associate
Health Behaviour Research Group
School of Medicine and Public Health
Faculty of Health and Medicine

Contact Details

Email elizabeth.fradgley@newcastle.edu.au
Phone (02) 4042 0642
Fax (02) 4042 0040
Links Research Networks
Research Networks
Google+

Office

Building HMRI Building L4 West
Location Callaghan
University Drive
Callaghan, NSW 2308
Australia
Edit