Mary C. Doherty

Mary C. Doherty


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

10Years (2017-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2017 in Leukemia Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SHSamantha A. Hershenfeld
Samantha A. Hershenfeld
KMKimberly Maki
Kimberly Maki
LRLana Rothfels
Lana Rothfels
CMCindy S. Murray
Cindy S. Murray
SNShannon Nixon
Shannon Nixon
MDMary C. Doherty
Mary C. Doherty

6 January 2025 in Journal of Cancer Education
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HAHaya Abuzuluf
Haya Abuzuluf
EGEleni Giannopoulos
Eleni Giannopoulos
PBPenelope Bradbury
Penelope Bradbury
MDMary C. Doherty
Mary C. Doherty
LDLaura Donahoe
Laura Donahoe
JPJanet K Papadakos
Janet K Papadakos

21 March 2024 in Current Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ADAaron Dou
Aaron Dou
Genevieve Bouchard-FortierGenevieve Bouchard-Fortier
Genevieve Bouchard-Fortier
KHKathy Han
Kathy Han
MMMichael Milosevic
Michael Milosevic
JLJelena Lukovic
Jelena Lukovic
JCJennifer Croke
Jennifer Croke
Background: The risk factors for acute care utilization in gynecologic oncology patients are poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate risk factors for the utilization of our centre’s acute care radiation nursing clinic (RNC) by gynecologic oncology patients receiving radiotherapy (RT). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of gynecological cancer patients treated with RT at an academic cancer centre between 1 August 2021 and 31 January 2022. Data on socio-demographics, clinical and treatment characteristics, and RNC visits were collected and summarized by descriptive statistics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test and chi-squared test/Fisher’s exact test were used for comparisons of continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Results: RT was delivered to 180 patients, of whom 42 (23%) received concurrent chemoradiation (CCR). Compared to those receiving RT alone, patients receiving CCR had higher rates of RNC utilization (55% vs. 19%, p < 0.001). Within the CCR cohort, patients who presented to the RNC were more likely to be unpartnered (43% vs. 11%, p = 0.04), receive a referral to Psychosocial Oncology (39% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.01), and experience treatment interruptions (52% vs. 16%, p = 0.02). There were no associations between RNC visits and age, disease site, or distance from the cancer centre. Conclusions: The receipt of CCR and specific psychosocial risk factors were associated with increased RNC utilization. Targeted strategies and early intervention to better meet the supportive care and psychosocial needs of this vulnerable population are needed.