Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33148483›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery2021

Nurse-led oral and maxillofacial oncology clinics: a review.

P Kyzas

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery, 2021. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
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

1 author.

P KyzasConsultant OMFS Head & Neck Surgeon, Department OMFS, Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, East Lancashire Hospitals Trust. Electronic address: kyzasp@icloud.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "nurse-led" oral and maxillofacial (OMFS) head and neck (H&N) clinic has been introduced and developed over the last decade, and we are now close to a point that this endeavour can potentially be implemented nationwide. This paper is a systematic review of the proposed OMFS H&N nurse-led clinic model. Literature on the topic is limited: only eight eligible papers were identified and reviewed. These were appraised focusing on four domains: requirement/necessity, true cost, patient safety and outcomes, and education and training. Most of the advantages/proposed benefits of these clinics have previously been discussed. This current review has revealed that the available published evidence on the concept of OMFS H&N nurse-led clinics demonstrates that they might not be necessary. The alleged cost savings have not been described in detail and might not be as significant as expected, more intense collaboration is required to establish watertight quality assurance processes concerning patient safety, and the clinics might have an impact on the education and training of OMFS trainees. The nurse-led clinic concept is interesting and exciting, but more discussion and planning is needed prior to it being launched nationwide.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesNurse's RoleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansNHSnurse-ledoncologysafe practiceTWW

Identifiers

PMID33148483
PMCPMC7438999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.