ArticleCancer2013
Implementing a breast cancer registry and treatment plan/summary program in clinical practice: a pilot program.
Article in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Survivorship care plan preferences of cancer survivors and health care providers: a systematic review and quality appraisal of the evidence.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2016Pooled it
- A randomized controlled trial of shared decision-making treatment planning process to enhance shared decision-making in patients with MBC.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Trial
- Empowering survivors after colorectal and lung cancer treatment: Pilot study of a Self-Management Survivorship Care Planning intervention.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2017Article
- Connecting the Dots: Linking the National Program of Cancer Registries and the Needs of Survivors and Clinicians.American journal of preventive medicine · 2015Article
- Challenges in the delivery of quality breast cancer care: initiation of adjuvant hormone therapy at an urban safety net hospital.Journal of oncology practice · 2014Article
- A framework for genomic biomarker actionability and its use in clinical decision making.Oncoscience · 2014Article
- Risk-based health care, the cancer survivor, the oncologist, and the primary care physician.Seminars in oncology · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a need to better measure and improve the quality of oncology care and improve communication with patients and other providers. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Registry (BCR) pilot evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of prospective data collection for quality assessment in daily clinical practice. Data were used to create and share treatment plans/summaries (TPSs) at the point of care.
methodsUsing a web-based tool, 20 diverse practices entered clinical data on each new early-stage breast cancer patient into the BCR for 14 months (September 2009 through November 2010). The tool created individual TPSs that were shared with patients. Practices received practice-specific and aggregate BCR quality measures data, participated in a survey, and received a participation stipend.
resultsTwenty practices entered 2014 patients into the BCR, collecting demographic, clinical, and treatment information. Fifty-two percent of practice participants replied to an end-of-pilot survey: 73% were satisfied with the BCR and web-based tool, 31% expressed concern regarding time and effort, and 52% reported additional practice costs during the pilot. Among those who created or shared the TPSs, 90% thought the documents improved oncologist-patient communication, and 95% favored using BCR data for practice quality improvement.
conclusionsProspective data collection for quality assessment is feasible and allows sharing of TPSs with patients at the point of care. Future efforts should focus on decreasing implementation burden to practices, broadening participation, examining costs, and, most importantly, assessing its effects on patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.