ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2006
Oncology care planning. Elements for care quality and management improving.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Professional burnout among Spanish medical oncologists.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe improvement of care quality depends on the education and skills of the professional team as well as on an adequate work method, which uses the right instruments of clinical management such as medical history, registers or protocols.
objectivesDefining standardized criteria related to the oncology care quality and applying them to a group of hospitals within the framework of continuous improvement establishing comparisons among them. MATERIAL AND
methodsInformation taken from 14 Andalusian public hospitals, in 2003 and first semester of 2004. A total of 35 variables were collected from official sources, validated studies and surveys as a starting point, grouped in four main issues (medical history, protocols, central commission and tumour sub-commissions), delays (diagnostic, treatment and early diagnostic), variability (cytostatics and radiotherapy), research (clinical trials and financed projects) and work loads. OUTCOMES: In 3 out of 14 centers medical histories are unique for each patient. In average, 3 of the 6 most frequent tumor locations have joint protocols. The delays for the diagnostic test vary from 1 to 23 days and from 11 to 29 days for treatments. The consumption increase of 12 cytostatics was of 71.8% (average of 602,413 euro per hospital). The average rate of patients undergoing irradiation was of 34 %. 109 clinical trials were approved (a centre performes 26) and 20 projects were financed (Health Department, Consejería de Salud). The attendance pressure was of 140 patients per specialist in MO and RO (maximum of 241 and 214 respectively and minimum of 85 and 69). COMMENTS: The information gathered in this study shows a diverse nature, and meets items not always taken into consideration, in a global way, but with a clearly complementary nature. No doubt, they offer a scenery that deepens into the complexity of which today means the improvement of the quality of the non-monographic hospital centres that attend patients suffering from cancer. It finally offers instruments for the improvement of the clinical management which we understand it is of certain usefulness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16648117What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.