ArticleDer Nervenarzt2015
[Patient-centered care. Improvement of communication between university medical centers and general practitioners for patients in neuro-oncology].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A survey on the implementation of clinical medication reviews in community pharmacies within a multidisciplinary setting.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Adapting patients' oncological treatment through remote participation of general practitioners in multi-disciplinary consultation meetings: A feasibility study.The European journal of general practice · 2022Article
- Improving communication between the general practitioner and the oncologist: a key role in coordinating care for patients suffering from cancer.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- The role of the general practitioner in cancer care: a survey of the patients' perspective.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCommunication between university medical centers and general practitioners (GP) is becoming increasingly more important in supportive patient care. A survey among GPs was performed with the primary objective to assess their opinion on current workflow and communication between GPs and the university medical center.
methodsThe GPs were asked to score (grades 1-6) their opinion on the current interdisciplinary workflow in the care of patients with brain tumors, thereby rating communication between a university medical center in general and the neuro-oncology outpatient center in particular.
resultsQuestionnaires were sent to1000 GPs and the response rate was 15 %. The mean scored evaluation of the university medical center in general was 2.62 and of the neuro-oncological outpatient clinic 2.28 (range 1-6). The most often mentioned issues to be improved were easier/early telephone information (44 %) and a constantly available contact person (49 %). Interestingly, > 60 % of the GPs indicated they would support web-based tumor boards for interdisciplinary and palliative neuro-oncological care.
conclusionAs interdisciplinary care for neuro-oncology patients is an essential part of therapy, improvement of communication between GPs and university medical centers is indispensable. Integrating currently available electronic platforms under data protection aspects into neuro-oncological palliative care could be an interesting tool in order to establish healthcare networks and could find acceptance with GPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26610342What 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.