ArticleBMC health services research2018
Benefits, barriers and opinions on multidisciplinary team meetings: a survey in Swedish cancer care.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
72 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 149 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumour boards and their quality of structures, processes, and team performance in multidisciplinary cancer care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Burnout syndrome and work engagement in nursing staff: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- An exploration into physician and surgeon data sensemaking: a qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Pooled it
- Factors influencing the quality and functioning of oncological multidisciplinary team meetings: results of a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- How prior spectacle prescriptions shape diagnostic behavior: evidence from a randomized field experiment on vision care in Western China.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- Patient awareness and perceptions of a kidney stone multidisciplinary team (MDT): a questionnaire survey.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Article
- A multidisciplinary paediatric endocrine genetic clinic: experience from a single tertiary centre.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Multi-disciplinarity in cancer care: a call for a global framework to deliver equitable and effective supportive care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Incentive Configuration Pathways for Standardization of Cancer Multidisciplinary Teams in China: A Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Enhancing Inter-institutional AI Research Collaboration Across Multidisciplinary Teams to Increase the National AI Workforce in Healthcare.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026Article
- Causes of diagnostic and treatment delays in locally advanced breast cancer: a nationwide multicenter survey and electronic health records analysis in Turkiye.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Editorial: Multidisciplinary Team Conference, What Is It Good For?Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- A Multicenter Study on Unnecessary Rebiopsies in CT-Guided Percutaneous Transthoracic Needle Biopsy of Pulmonary Lesions.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT in clinical multidisciplinary treatment: a retrospective study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- An interdisciplinary challenge: responsibilities in German cancer-related fatigue management from the professional and patient perspective.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Impact of rectal cancer multidisciplinary conferences on patient care plans.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary Evaluation for COPD Management.Respiratory care · 2025Article
- The Approach to Multidisciplinary Oncologic Breast Care.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2025Review
- Introduction to Multidisciplinary Clinics and Their Value.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2025Review
12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCase review and discussion at multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) have evolved into standard practice in cancer care with the aim to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations. As a basis for work to optimize the MDTMs, we investigated participants' views on the meeting function, including perceived benefits and barriers.
methodsIn a cross-sectional study design, 244 health professionals from south Sweden rated MDTM meeting structure and function, benefits from these meetings and barriers to reach a treatment recommendation.
resultsThe top-ranked advantages from MDTMs were support for patient management and competence development. Low ratings applied to monitoring patients for clinical trial inclusion and structured work to improve the MDTM. Nurses and cancer care coordinators did less often than physicians report involvement in the case discussions. Major benefits from MDTM were reported to be more accurate treatment recommendations, multidisciplinary evaluation and adherence to clinical guidelines. Major barriers to a joint treatment recommendation were reported to be need for supplementary investigations and insufficient pathology reports.
conclusionsHealth professionals' report multiple benefits from MDTMs, but also define areas for improvement, e.g. access to complete information and clarified roles for the different health professions. The emerging picture suggests that structures for regular MDTM evaluations and increased focus on patient-related perspectives should be developed and implemented.
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.