ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2013
Developing a national 'low risk' febrile neutropenia framework for use in children and young people's cancer care.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The influence of different fever definitions on the rate of fever in neutropenia diagnosed in children with cancer.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA Delphi study was undertaken to develop a framework guidance that would rationalise and standardise the care of children with febrile neutropenia (FNP) across the UK.
methodsA mailed Delphi survey was undertaken with health professionals working in children's cancer units. The survey employed two rounds of feedback on 22 practice statements drawn from a systematic review of clinical evidence. Consensus was assumed for any statement where 80+ % of respondents indicated that they "agreed" or "strongly agreed".
resultsConsensus was reached on 21 of the 22 practice statements in round 1 that were categorised into six areas: definition of fever and neutropenia, initial management and choice of antibiotic, defining low-risk patients, strategy in low-risk patients and alternative approaches. Consensus could not be reached on whether patients needed to be afebrile to be suitable for discharge and the required length of outpatient antibiotic treatment.
conclusionsA Delphi survey allowed the successful development of a national framework for identification and management of children with FNP. The use of an existing well-functioning professional network was key in this project's success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23262805What 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.