ReviewESMO open2020
Breast Cancer: global quality care optimizing care delivery with existing financial and personnel resources.
Review in ESMO open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Survival Patterns Among Patients With Breast Cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Global patterns, temporal trends and socioeconomic inequalities in the burden of breast cancer: a population-based study across 185 countries.Cancer biology & medicine · 2026Article
- The financial toxicity of breast cancer: a systematic mapping of the literature and identification of research challenges.Radiology and oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Inducing breast cancer cell death: The impact of taxodone on proliferation through apoptosis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- High-value breast cancer care within resource limitations.The oncologist · 2024Review
- The Secretome of Parental and Bone Metastatic Breast Cancer Elicits Distinct Effects in Human Osteoclast Activity after Activation of β2 Adrenergic Signaling.Biomolecules · 2023Article
- More recent insights into the breast cancer burden across BRICS-Plus: Health consequences in key nations with emerging economies using the global burden of disease study 2019.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Gaps in completion and timeliness of breast surgery and adjuvant therapy: a retrospective cohort of Haitian patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Assessment of potential process quality indicators for systemic treatment of breast cancer in Belgium: a population-based study.ESMO open · 2021Article
- New Frontiers for Fairer Breast Cancer Care in a Globalized World.European journal of breast health · 2021Review
- Breast Cancer: global quality care optimizing care delivery with existing financial and personnel resources.ESMO open · 2020Review
- Revisiting Alma Ata: A Blueprint for Cancer Care.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our vision about breast cancer quality care within a global health framework was recently published by Oxford University Press. The aim of our work was to reflect on the potential to achieve a world-wide improvement in quality care, assessing value for money. The population-based survival estimates from the CONCORD programme and the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) are valuable tools for this global effort. Because cancer care delivery is becoming unsustainable in many countries assessing healthcare value for the cost is becoming increasingly important. Recommendations are made for better global quality care for patients with breast cancer.
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.