Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30628155›Full record

ReviewMolecular oncology2019

Bridging research and clinical care - the comprehensive cancer centre.

Simon Oberst

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

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

1 author.

Simon OberstCancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Comprehensive cancer centres (CCCs) are at the heart of the landscape of cancer research, education and care in Europe. They are vital hubs where the historic gaps in the research to clinical care continuum are bridged. CCCs have established hallmarks, but a greater emphasis is needed in Europe to create more effective CCCs using the partnership model of university medical centres and university research departments and institutes. This review will summarise the organisational structures and processes essential for producing quality outcomes for patients and effectiveness in the translational process. The Organisation of European Cancer Institutes and European Academy of Cancer Sciences have established complementary quality accreditations systems to test the clinical and research excellence of CCCs. The EU should have an ambition to create more CCCs based on university hospitals, for each 5-10 million population and in every Member State.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCancer Care FacilitiesEuropeHumansNeoplasmsQuality of Health CareTreatment Outcomeaccreditationcomprehensive cancer centreoutcomesquality

Identifiers

PMID30628155
PMCPMC6396367

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.