ReviewJournal of the advanced practitioner in oncology
Development of a Professional Practice Model for Neuro-oncology Advanced Practitioners at an Academic Medical Center: A Quality Improvement Project.
Review in Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In medicine, neuro-oncology practice falls outside the scope of established practice requirements for the specialties of neurology, medical oncology, and neurosurgery, justifying the prerequisite of specialized training to practice neuro-oncology. Neuro-oncology advanced practitioners (AP) also require specialization beyond the scope of population-based generalist training and education. This quality improvement project's primary purpose was to develop a professional practice model (PPM) for APs employed at an academic medical center (AMC) ambulatory neuro-oncology practice. Using the focus, analyze, develop, execute, and evaluate (FADE) quality improvement methodology, the authors (1) reviewed literature and relevant professional organizations to identify possible professional competencies for neuro-oncology APs; (2) analyzed data to develop evidence-based practice domains; (3) used purposive sampling to recruit an interprofessional team of neuro-oncology experts; and (4) conducted a Delphi study with an interprofessional team of experts to gain consensus on practice domains and professional competencies. Twenty-three participants (n = 23) were recruited for the Delphi study, which was executed via electronic transmission using the Web-based software Qualtrics. After two rounds of the Delphi survey, the expert team reached consensus on six domains of practice, with 50 corresponding competency statements. Through interprofessional collaboration and consensus, this quality improvement project successfully created a PPM for an AMC neuro-oncology AP team. The PPM supports neuro-oncology APs by validating the unique set of skills that combines several specialties. The PPM provided the framework to standardize orientation and training, evaluate performance, and support the professional development of an AMC neuro-oncology AP team.
Identifiers
31086684PMC6505547What 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.