ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2017
Moving Forward Through Consensus: A Modified Delphi Approach to Determine the Top Research Priorities in Orthopaedic Oncology.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Surveillance After Extremity Tumor Surgery (SAFETY) Pilot International Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Trial
- Barriers to conducting prospective multicentre studies in paediatric orthopaedics in Europe: Insights from the EPOS Discoid Meniscus (DiMe) project.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a checklist for evaluating root canal treatment performance in Taiwan.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Short and mid-term research priorities for Veterans with multiple sclerosis: A modified Delphi process engaging Veterans, researchers, and operational partners.Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2025Article
- Standardized reporting of spine and sacroiliac joints in axial spondyloarthritis MRI: from the ESSR-Arthritis Subcommittee.European radiology · 2025Article
- Developing consensus for upper limb rehabilitation, physical preparation and return to climbing in adults: protocol for an international e-Delphi study.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- A Survey to Determine the Zone of Equipoise for the Proximal FEmur Resection or Internal Fixation fOR Metastases (PERFORM) Randomized Controlled Trial.Research square · 2024Article
- Article
- Patient and public involvement in cancer research: A scoping review.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- What are the indications and survivorship of tumor endoprosthetic reconstructions for patients with extremity metastatic bone disease?Journal of surgical oncology · 2023Review
- Examining patient perspectives on sarcoma surveillance: The Sarcoma Surveillance Survey.Surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Willingness of patients with sarcoma to participate in cancer surveillance research: a cross-sectional patient survey.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Communication in surgical decision-making while managing metastatic bone disease: matching patient expectations with surgical goals.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- The Rockefeller Team Science Leadership training program: Curriculum, standardized assessment of competencies, and impact of returning assessments.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Designing a Rational Follow-Up Schedule for Patients with Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020Article
- Defining massive rotator cuff tears: a Delphi consensus study.Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2020Article
- Article
- CORR Insights®: How Often Do Acetabular Erosions Occur After Bipolar Hip Endoprostheses in Patients With Malignant Tumors and Are Erosions Associated With Outcomes Scores?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byCORR Insights2017
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral challenges presently impede the conduct of prospective clinical studies in orthopaedic oncology, including limited financial resources to support their associated costs and inadequate patient volume at most single institutions. This study was conducted to prioritize research questions within the field so that the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS), and other relevant professional societies, can direct the limited human and fiscal resources available to address the priorities that the stakeholders involved believe will have the most meaningful impact on orthopaedic oncology patient care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to use a formal consensus-based approach involving clinician-scientists and other stakeholders to identify the top priority research questions for future international prospective clinical studies in orthopaedic oncology.
methodsA three-step modified Delphi process involving multiple stakeholder groups (including orthopaedic oncologists, research personnel, funding agency representation, and patient representation) was conducted. First, we sent an electronic questionnaire to all participants to solicit clinically relevant research questions (61 participants; 54% of the original 114 individuals invited to participate returned the questionnaires). Then, participants rated the candidate research questions using a 5-point Likert scale for five criteria (60 participants; 53% of the original group participated in this portion of the process). Research questions that met a priori consensus thresholds progressed for consideration to an in-person consensus meeting, which was attended by 44 participants (39% of the original group; 12 countries were represented at this meeting). After the consensus panel's discussion, members individually assigned scores to each question using a 9-point Likert scale. Research questions that met preset criteria advanced to final ranking, and panel members individually ranked their top three priority research questions, resulting in a final overall ranking of research priorities.
resultsA total of 73 candidate research questions advanced to the consensus meeting. In the end, the consensus panel identified four research priorities: (1) Does less intensive surveillance of patients with sarcoma affect survival? (2) What are the survival outcomes over time for orthopaedic oncology implants? (3) Does resection versus stabilization improve oncologic and functional outcomes in oligometastatic bone disease? (4) What is the natural history of untreated fibromatosis?
conclusionsThe results of this study will assist in developing a long-term research strategy for the MSTS and, possibly, the orthopaedic oncology field as a whole. Furthermore, the results of this study can assist researchers in guiding their research efforts and in providing a justified rationale to funding agencies when requesting the resources necessary to support future collaborative research studies that address the identified orthopaedic oncology priorities.
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.