Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30825025›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: a Delphi consensus study.

M E Stegmann, T M Homburg, J M Meijer, J Nuver, K Havenga, T J N Hiltermann, J H Maduro, J Schuling, D Brandenbarg, A J Berendsen

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Differences in discharge letter content: oncologists' vs. home care physicians' needs.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Feasibility of a comprehensive medication review to improve medication use for patients with cancer and comorbid conditions.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

M E StegmannUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. m.e.stegmann@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8491-1407
T M HomburgUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J M MeijerUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J NuverUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of Medical Oncology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
K HavengaUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
T J N HiltermannUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J H MaduroUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J SchulingUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
D BrandenbargUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
A J BerendsenUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University of Groningen, HPC FA 21, Postbus 30.001, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo provide optimal care for patients with cancer, timely and efficient communication between healthcare providers is essential. In this study, we aimed to achieve consensus regarding the desired content of communication between general practitioners (GPs) and oncology specialists before and during the initial treatment of cancer.

methodsIn a two-round Delphi procedure, three expert panels reviewed items recommended for inclusion on referral and specialist letters.

resultsThe three panels comprised 39 GPs (42%), 42 oncology specialists (41%) (i.e. oncologists, radiotherapists, urologists and surgeons) and 18 patients or patient representatives (69%). Final agreement was by consensus, with 12 and 35 items included in the GP referral and the specialist letters, respectively. The key requirements of GP referral letters were that they should be limited to medical facts, a short summary of symptoms and abnormal findings, and the reason for referral. There was a similar requirement for letters from specialists to include these same medical facts, but detailed information was also required about the diagnosis, treatment options and chosen treatment. After two rounds, the overall content validity index (CVI) for both letters was 71%, indicating that a third round was not necessary. DISCUSSION: This is the first study to differentiate between essential and redundant information in GP referral and specialist letters, and the findings could be used to improve communication between primary and secondary care.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsAdultDelphi TechniqueFemaleGeneral PractitionersHealth CommunicationHumansMaleMedical OncologyMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOncologistsPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationSecondary Health CareSpecializationCorrespondenceOncologyPrimary careSecondary care

Identifiers

PMID30825025
PMCPMC6803614

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.