ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016
How efficient is translational research in radiation oncology? The example of a large Dutch academic radiation oncology department.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What is the impact of innovation on output in healthcare with a special focus on treatment innovations in radiotherapy? A literature review.The British journal of radiology · 2017Pooled it
- Exploring the translational challenge for medical applications of ionising radiation and corresponding radiation protection research.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Integrating nanomedicine into clinical radiotherapy regimens.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2019Review
- Why should radiation oncology do translational research? [corrected].Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyReview
- Adoption of Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective: To study the efficiency of research implementation in a large radiotherapy institute, in either an internal review board-approved clinical trial or clinical routine.
methods: Scientific publications of the institute were listed. We asked clinicians from tumour expert groups whether the study had been implemented yet in a clinical trial or in clinical practice and which facilitators or barriers were relevant. An independent investigator verified all results. We calculated the implementation rates and the frequency of mentioned facilitators and barriers.
results: Resident researchers had published 234 studies over the past 4 years. Overall, 70/234 (30%) technical or preclinical studies were tested or implemented in a clinical environment in either trials or routine. In total, 45/234 (19%) studies were routinely implemented; in the 61 clinical studies, this percentage was higher: 38% (23/61). The main facilitator was the level of evidence and the main barriers were workload and high complexity.
conclusion: We were able to calculate the implementation ratio of published research into clinical practice and set benchmark figures for other radiotherapy clinics. Level of evidence was an important facilitator, while workload and high complexity of the new procedures were important barriers for implementation. Recent articles suggest that academic entrepreneurship will facilitate this process further. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: This study is the first of its kind calculating implementation rates of published studies in the clinical environment and can contribute to the efficiency of translational research in radiotherapy. We propose to use this metric as a quality indicator to evaluate academic departments.
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.