Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23904767›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2013

Canadian integrative oncology research priorities: results of a consensus-building process.

L C Weeks, D Seely, L G Balneaves, H S Boon, A Leis, D Oneschuk, S M Sagar, M J Verhoef

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Prioritizing Chinese medicine clinical research questions in cancer palliative care from patient and caregiver perspectives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Defining research priorities for bacterial sexually transmitted infections in Canada.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2014
    Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

L C WeeksOttawa Integrative Cancer Centre, Ottawa, ON.
D Seely
L G Balneaves
H S Boon
A Leis
D Oneschuk
S M Sagar
M J Verhoef

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Canada, many diverse models of integrative oncology care have emerged in response to the growing number of cancer patients who combine complementary therapies with their conventional medical treatments. The increasing interest in integrative oncology emphasizes the need to engage stakeholders and to work toward consensus on research priorities and a collaborative research agenda. The Integrative Canadian Oncology Research Initiative initiated a consensus-building process to meet that need and to develop an action plan that will implement a Canadian research agenda.

methodsA two-day consensus workshop was held after completion of a Delphi survey and stakeholder interviews.

resultsFIVE INTERRELATED PRIORITY RESEARCH AREAS WERE IDENTIFIED AS THE FOUNDATION FOR A CANADIAN RESEARCH AGENDA: EffectivenessSafetyResource and health services utilizationKnowledge translationDeveloping integrative oncology models Research is needed within each priority area from a range of different perspectives (for example, patient, practitioner, health system) and in a way that reflects a continuum of integration from the addition of a single complementary intervention within conventional cancer care to systemic change. Strategies to implement a Canadian integrative oncology research agenda were identified, and working groups are actively developing projects in line with those strategic areas. Of note is the intention to develop a national network for integrative oncology research and knowledge translation.

conclusionsThe identified research priorities reflect the needs and perspectives of a spectrum of integrative oncology stakeholders. Ongoing stakeholder consultation, including engagement from new stakeholders, is needed to ensure appropriate uptake and implementation of a Canadian research agenda.

Indexed as

camCanadacomplementary medicineconsensus developmentIntegrative oncologyresearch priorities

Identifiers

PMID23904767
PMCPMC3728057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.