Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31806986›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2019

Evaluating A Multidisciplinary Cancer Conference Checklist: Practice Versus Perceptions.

Arden L Corter, Brittany Speller, Kristin McBain, Frances C Wright, May Lynn Quan, Erin Kennedy, Selina Schmocker, Nancy N Baxter, RUBY Cohort Investigators

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Arden L CorterDepartment of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9746-9029
Brittany SpellerDepartment of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Kristin McBainApplied Health Research Centre, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2364-7371
Frances C WrightDepartment of Surgery, Sunnybrook Hospital, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
May Lynn QuanDepartment of Surgery, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada.
Erin KennedyDivision of General Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Selina SchmockerDivision of General Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Nancy N BaxterDepartment of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
RUBY Cohort Investigators
St. Michael's Hospital · CAMount Sinai Hospital · CAFoothills Medical Centre · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPresentation to multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs) supports optimal treatment of young women with breast cancer (YWBC). However, research shows barriers to MCC practice, and variation in professional attendance and referral patterns. A checklist may help overcome these barriers and support MCC practice with YWBC.

methodsWe developed, piloted and evaluated an MCC checklist in sites participating in a pan-Canadian study (RUBY; Reducing the bUrden of Breast cancer in Young women). A survey assessed checklist processes and impacts, and checklist data were analysed for checklist uptake, MCC presentation rates and MCC processes including staff attendance.

resultsFifteen RUBY sites used the checklist (~50%), mostly for data collection/tracking. Some positive effects on clinical practice such as increased presentation of YWBC at MCC were reported, but most survey participants indicated that MCC processes were sufficient without the checklist. Conversely, checklist data show that only 31% of patients were presented at MCC. Of those, 41% were recommended treatment change.

conclusionDespite limited checklist uptake, there was evidence of its clinical practice benefit. Furthermore, it supported data collection/quality monitoring. Critically, checklist data showed gaps in MCC practice and low MCC presentation rates for YWBC. This contrasts with overall provider perceptions that MCCs are working well. Findings suggest that supports for MCC are needed but may best take the form of clear national practice recommendations and audit and feedback cycles to inform awareness of good MCC practice and outcomes. In this setting, tools like the MCC checklist may become helpful in supporting MCC practice.

Indexed as

breast neoplasmcancer conferencechecklistevaluationimplementationmultidisciplinary

Identifiers

PMID31806986
PMCPMC6830376
OpenAlexW2982347621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.