Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29244984›Full record

ArticleJournal of global oncology2017

Cancer Pathology Turnaround Time at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, the Largest Referral Center in Malawi for Oncology Patients.

Leo P L Masamba, Petani E Mtonga, Linda Kalilani Phiri, Brittany L Bychkovsky

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
13.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Management ofEcancermedicalscience · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Pathology and cancer in Africa.Ecancermedicalscience · 2019
    Article
  14. Evaluating the use of pathology in improving diagnosis in rural Malawi.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Leo P L MasambaLeo P.L. Masamba and Petani E. Mtonga, Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital; Linda Kalilani Phiri, University of Malawi College of Medicine, Blantyre, Malawi; Brittany L. Bychkovsky, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Petani E MtongaLeo P.L. Masamba and Petani E. Mtonga, Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital; Linda Kalilani Phiri, University of Malawi College of Medicine, Blantyre, Malawi; Brittany L. Bychkovsky, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Linda Kalilani PhiriLeo P.L. Masamba and Petani E. Mtonga, Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital; Linda Kalilani Phiri, University of Malawi College of Medicine, Blantyre, Malawi; Brittany L. Bychkovsky, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Brittany L BychkovskyLeo P.L. Masamba and Petani E. Mtonga, Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital; Linda Kalilani Phiri, University of Malawi College of Medicine, Blantyre, Malawi; Brittany L. Bychkovsky, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital · MW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose In all settings, a need exists for expedited pathology processing for patients with a suspected cancer diagnosis. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with limited resources, processing pathology samples is particularly challenging, so the measurement of turnaround times (TATs) for pathology results is an important quality metric. We explored the pathology TAT for suspected cancer patients at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Malawi to determine whether a difference exists when patients paid an out-of-pocket fee (paid for [PF] v nonpaid for [NPF]) to facilitate sample processing. Methods and Population This retrospective descriptive study included all patients with suspected cancer (N = 544) who underwent incisional and excisional biopsy in 2010 at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, a teaching hospital in Malawi. Data were abstracted from patient charts and administrative forms to build a database and determine the TAT for PF and NPF samples. Results The median TAT for the 544 patients was 71 days (interquartile range [IQR], 31 to 118 days). The median pathology processing time was 31 days (IQR, 15 to 52 days) and was shorter for PF versus NPF samples. The median TAT was 43 days for PF samples (IQR, 27 to 69 days) versus 101 days for NPF samples (IQR, 31 to 118 days), which was significantly different by the Wilcoxon rank sum test ( P < .01). Conclusion The TAT for pathology samples among patients with suspected cancer was longer than reported for other African countries during the study period, was longer than considered acceptable in high-income countries, and differed between PF and NPF samples.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHospitalsHumansMalawiMaleMedical OncologyMiddle AgedNeoplasmsReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29244984
PMCPMC5735957
OpenAlexW2606722886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.