Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33431493›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Systematic and continuous collection of patient-reported outcomes and experience in women with cancer undergoing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a study protocol for the Tuscany Region (Italy).

Francesca Ferrè, Sabina De Rosis, Anna Maria Murante, Kendall Jamieson Gilmore, Matteo Ghilli, Donatella Mariniello, Sabina Nuti, Manuela Roncella

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Francesca FerrèDepartment EMbeDS, Institute of Management, MeS Management and Health Laboratory, Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Toscana, Italy francesca.ferre@santannapisa.it.ORCID 0000-0001-5781-517X
Sabina De RosisDepartment EMbeDS, Institute of Management, MeS Management and Health Laboratory, Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8781-401X
Anna Maria MuranteDepartment EMbeDS, Institute of Management, MeS Management and Health Laboratory, Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Kendall Jamieson GilmoreDepartment EMbeDS, Institute of Management, MeS Management and Health Laboratory, Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Matteo GhilliBreast Cancer Centre, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Donatella MarinielloBreast Cancer Centre, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Sabina NutiDepartment EMbeDS, Institute of Management, MeS Management and Health Laboratory, Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Manuela RoncellaBreast Cancer Centre, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Toscana, Italy.
Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMonitoring how patients feel and what they experience during the care process gives health professionals data to improve the quality of care, and gives health systems information to better design and implement care pathways. To gain new insights about specific gaps and/or strengths in breast cancer care, we measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported experiences (PREs) for women receiving immediate breast reconstruction (iBR). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prospective, multicentre, cohort study with continuous and systematic web-based data collection from women diagnosed with breast cancer, who have an indication for iBR after mastectomy treated at any Breast Unit (BU) in Tuscany Region (Italy). Patients are classified into one of two groups under conditions of routine clinical practice, based on the type of iBR planned (implant and autologous reconstruction). Patient-reported information are obtained prior to and after surgery (at 3-month and 12-month follow-up). We estimate that there are around 700 annual eligible patients.Descriptive analyses are used to assess trends in PROs over time and differences between types of iBR in PROs and PREs. Additionally, econometric models are used to analyse patient and BU characteristics associated with outcomes and experiences. PREs are evaluated to assess aspects of integrated care along the care pathway. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been reviewed and obtained a nihil obstat from the Tuscan Ethics Committees of the three Area Vasta in 2017. Dissemination of results will be via periodic report, journal articles and conference presentations.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMammaplastyCohort StudiesFemaleHumansItalyMastectomyPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective Studiesbreast tumoursclinical governanceprotocols & guidelinesquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID33431493
PMCPMC7802685
OpenAlexW3118749857

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.