ArticleJournal of oncology practice2016
Resolving Rivalries and Realigning Goals: Challenges of Clinical and Research Multiteam Systems.
Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multidisciplinary clinician perspectives on avoidable emergency department use by patients during cancer treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- "The Truth Is, We Must Miss Some": A Qualitative Study of the Patient Eligibility Screening Process, and Automation Perspectives, for Cancer Clinical Trials.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Better Late Than Never: Fully Incorporating Oncology Advanced Practice Providers Into Cancer Clinical Trials.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Longitudinal Experience With and Impressions of COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Changes.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Incivility Is Associated with Burnout and Reduced Compassion Satisfaction: A Mixed-Method Study to Identify Causes of Burnout among Oncology Clinical Research Coordinators.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2021Article
- The Anatomy and Physiology of Teaming in Cancer Care Delivery: A Conceptual Framework.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- The relationship between Indigenous and allopathic health practitioners in Africa and its implications for collaboration: a qualitative synthesis.Global health action · 2020Article
- Functional Leadership in Interteam Contexts: Understanding 'What' in the Context of Why? Where? When? and Who?The leadership quarterly · 2020Article
- Definition and Coordination of Roles and Responsibilities Among Cancer Center Clinic and Research Personnel.JCO oncology practice · 2020Article
- Cancer Center Clinic and Research Team Perceptions of Identity and Interactions.Journal of oncology practice · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This article describes the care processes for a 64-year-old man with newly diagnosed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who was enrolled in a first-line clinical trial of a new immunotherapy regimen. The case highlights the concept of multiteam systems in cancer clinical research and clinical care. Because clinical research represents a highly dynamic entity-with studies frequently opening, closing, and undergoing modifications-concerted efforts of multiple teams are needed to respond to these changes while continuing to provide consistent, high-level care and timely, accurate clinical data. The case illustrates typical challenges of multiteam care processes. Compared with clinical tasks that are routinely performed by single teams, multiple-team care greatly increases the demands for communication, collaboration, cohesion, and coordination among team members. As the case illustrates, the described research team and clinical team are separated, resulting in suboptimal function. Individual team members interact predominantly with members of their own team. A considerable number of team members lack regular interaction with anyone outside their team. Accompanying this separation, the teams enact rivalries that impede collaboration. The teams have misaligned goals and competing priorities that create competition. Collective identity and cohesion across the two teams are low. Research team and clinical team members have limited knowledge of the roles and work of individuals outside their team. Recommendations to increase trust and collaboration are provided. Clinical providers and researchers may incorporate these themes into development and evaluation of multiteam systems, multidisciplinary teams, and cross-functional teams within their own institutions.
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.