ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2019
Stakeholders' Perceptions and Information Needs Regarding Research Medical Donation.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determinants of Interest-Holder Perspectives Toward Post-Mortem Tissue Donation in Oncology: A Systematic Review.Psycho-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
contextResearch Medical Donation (RMD), which entails collecting human tissue within hours after death, benefits cancer research but data are limited regarding barriers institutions face accruing patients to RMD programs.
objectivesThe objective of this study was to generate stakeholder perspectives to best inform the complex RMD process, which includes communicating with patients and their proxies and procuring tissue in a timely manner, all the while respecting end-of-life care sensitivities.
methodsWe explored perceived core needs and challenges of RMD by engaging stakeholders (cancer clinicians, patients, and their caregivers) in eight teleconference focus groups. Breast, pancreatic, and lung cancer clinicians comprised two groups. Each cancer separately had two groups for patients and their caregivers combined. Qualitative analysis of focus group transcripts included identifying and reaching group consensus on transcript themes and establishing agreement on consensus templates to identify primary common and divergent themes.
resultsA total of 45 people (13 clinicians, 24 patients, eight caregivers) participated in the groups. The themes identified were as follows: 1) clinicians and patients had limited previous knowledge about RMD; 2) RMD was perceived to mainly benefit research; 3) logistical and privacy questions arose; 4) introducing RMD was deemed sensitive, with patient-specific timing; 5) rare and/or virulent cancers appeared associated with willingness to participate in RMD.
conclusionPatients, families, and cancer clinicians have generally low knowledge of RMD but, upon learning about it, deem it valuable for scientific advancement (particularly for rare and virulent cancers), necessary to be carried out with individualized sensitivity to end-of-life issues, and through training programs with involved clinical staff.
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.