Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29910658›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2018

Clinical practice guidelines in breast cancer.

N Kumar Tyagi, S Dhesy-Thind

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Unveiling breast cancer disparities: comparative insights from Asian and Western populations.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N Kumar TyagiDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
S Dhesy-ThindDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
McMaster University Medical Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A number of clinical practice guidelines (cpgs) concerning breast cancer (bca) screening and management are available. Here, we review the strengths and weaknesses of cpgs from various professional organizations and consensus groups with respect to their methodologic quality, recommendations, and implementability. Methods: Guidelines from four groups were reviewed with respect to two clinical scenarios: adjuvant ovarian function suppression (ofs) in premenopausal women with early-stage estrogen receptor-positive bca, and use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (slnb) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nac) for locally advanced bca. Guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (asco); Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence Based Care (cco's pebc); the U.S. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (nccn); and the St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Consensus Conference were reviewed by two independent assessors. Guideline methodology and applicability were evaluated using the agree ii tool. Results: The quality of the cpgs was greatest for the guidelines developed by asco and cco's pebc. The nccn and St. Gallen guidelines were found to have lower scores for methodologic rigour. All guidelines scored poorly for applicability. The recommendations for ofs were similar in three guidelines. Recommendations by the various organizations for the use of slnb after nac were contradictory. Conclusions: Our review demonstrated that cpgs can be heterogeneous in methodologic quality. Low-quality cpg implementation strategies contribute to low uptake of, and adherence to, bca cpgs. Further research examining the barriers to recommendations-such as intrinsic guideline characteristics and the needs of end users-is required. The use of bca cpgs can improve the knowledge-to-practice gap and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMedical OncologyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Societies, Medicalagree iiBreast cancerclinical practice guidelines

Identifiers

PMID29910658
PMCPMC6001762
OpenAlexW2807842032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.