ArticleBMJ open2019
Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences in breast cancer care (PINTU): a mixed-methods study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- From consultation to choice: gynecologic cancer patients' perspectives on shared decision making in clinical practice - findings from a cross-sectional observational qualitative interview study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Observational
- Treatment confidence and patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences: A structural equation modeling approach.Cancer medicine · 2024Observational
- The effect of multidisciplinary team on survival rates of women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Shared-Decision-Making Experiences in Breast Cancer Care with and without Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences: A Mixed-Methods-Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- How shared is decision-making in multidisciplinary tumour conferences with patient participation? An observational study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Observational
- Team functioning across different tumour types: Insights from a Swiss cancer center using qualitative and quantitative methods.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences: How is it implemented? What is the patients' role? What are patients' experiences?Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Observational
- Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Breast Cancer Care - An Observational Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- The Next Step Toward Patient-Centeredness in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings: An Interview Study with Professionals.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences from the Providers' Perspective: Is It Feasible in Routine Cancer Care?Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2020Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA central instrument of multidisciplinary care is the multidisciplinary tumour conference (MTC). In MTCs, diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients are discussed, and therapy recommendations are worked out. As we found previously, patients participate in MTCs in some breast cancer centres in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. However, studies on risks and benefits of patient participation have not provided substantiated findings. Therefore, the study's objective is to analyse differences between MTCs with and without patient participation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an exploratory mixed-methods study. MTCs in six breast and gynaecological cancer centres in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, are examined. MTCs will be conducted with and without patient participation. First, interviews with providers concentrating on the feasibility of patient participation and quality of decision-making will be carried out, transcribed and analysed by means of content analysis. Second, videotaped or audiotaped participatory observations in MTCs will be executed. Video data or transcribed audio data from video and audio recordings will be coded using the established "Observational Assessment Rating Scale" for MTCs and analysed by comparing centres with and without patient participation. Third, all patients will fill out a questionnaire before and after MTC, including questions on psychosocial situation, decision-making and expectations before and experiences after MTC. The questionnaire data will be analysed by means of descriptive and multivariate statistics and pre-post-differences within and between groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Consultation and a positive vote from the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne have been obtained. For all collected data, relevant data protection regulations will be adhered to. All personal identifiers from patients and providers will be pseudonymised, except video recordings. Dissemination strategies include a discussion with patients and providers in workshops about topics such as feasibility, risks and benefits of patient participation in MTCs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00012552.
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.