Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30241241›Full record

ArticleJournal of global oncology2018

Global Survey of Clinical Oncology Workforce.

Aju Mathew

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.7field-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

67 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aju MathewUniversity of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; and Kerala Cancer Care, Kochi, India.
University of Kentucky · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A lack of well-trained clinical oncologists can result in significant cancer health disparities. The magnitude of this problem around the world is poorly described in the literature. A comprehensive global survey of the clinical oncology workforce was conducted. Data on the number of clinical oncologists in 93 countries were obtained from 30 references. The mortality-to-incidence ratio was estimated by using data on incidence and mortality rates from the GLOBOCAN 2012 database; the ratio was > 70% in 26 countries (28%), which included 21 countries in Africa (66%) and five countries in Asia (26%). Eight countries had no clinical oncologist available to provide care for patients with cancer. In 22 countries (24%), a clinical oncologist would provide care for < 150 patients with a new diagnosis of cancer. In 39 countries (42%), a clinical oncologist would provide care for > 500 patients with cancer. In 27 countries (29%), a clinical oncologist would provide care for > 1,000 incident cancers, of which 25 were in Africa, two were in Asia, and none were in Europe or the Americas. The economic and social development status of a country correlates closely with the burden of cancer and the shortage of human resources. Addressing the shortage of clinical oncologists in regions with a critical need will help these countries meet the sustainable development goals for noncommunicable diseases by 2030.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMaleMedical OncologySurveys and QuestionnairesWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID30241241
PMCPMC6223442
OpenAlexW2786545403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.