ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2020
Preliminary Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation of DESIREE, a Decision Support Platform for the Management of Primary Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancements in triple-negative breast cancer sub-typing, diagnosis and treatment with assistance of artificial intelligence : a focused review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Challenges and perspectives in use of artificial intelligence to support treatment recommendations in clinical oncology.Cancer medicine · 2024Review
- Artificial intelligence: opportunities and challenges in the clinical applications of triple-negative breast cancer.British journal of cancer · 2023Review
- Identification of Novel Pyroptosis-Related lncRNAs Associated with the Prognosis of Breast Cancer Through Interactive Analysis.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The DESIREE project has developed a platform offering several complementary therapeutic decision support systems (DSSs) to improve care quality for breast cancer patients. A first assessment of the system was carried out in close-to-real tumor boards (TBs). Fourteen TB sessions were organized corresponding to a total of 125 exploitable decisions previously made without the system and re-played with the system after a washout period in three pilot sites. Results show an overestimation of declared compliance with guidelines when not using the system as compared to measured compliance with the recommendations issued from the guideline-based DSS of DESIREE. After using the system, measured compliance rate of decisions with guidelines was significantly improved from 74.4% to 89.6%. Most of the changes in decisions when using the guideline-based DSS were associated with non-compliant decisions that became compliant. Qualitative analysis and interviews showed that despite maturity issues, clinicians found DESIREE DSSs innovative and promising.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33936477PMC8075492W3159843613What 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.