ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021
The Next Step Toward Patient-Centeredness in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings: An Interview Study with Professionals.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers to timely nutrition support in patients with cancer: A scoping review.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2026Article
- How I Do It: Interprofessional Education and Radiation Therapy-Establishing Opportunities for Student Learning in the Workplace.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Barriers to Implementing Shared Decision-Making in Postgraduate Medical Education: The Role of Disease-Centered Beliefs.Perspectives on medical education · 2025Article
- Clinical Utility of Integrated Multidisciplinary Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Care: A Mixed Methods Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Treatment confidence and patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences: A structural equation modeling approach.Cancer medicine · 2024Observational
- Integrated Electronic Health Record of Multidisciplinary Professionals Throughout the Cancer Care Pathway: A Pilot Study Exploring Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Patients.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Tools and Strategies to Integrate Multi-Domain Information for Personalized Decision-Making in Oncological Care Pathways: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Article
- What makes the palliative care initial encounter meaningful? A descriptive study with patients with cancer, family carers and palliative care professionals.Palliative medicine · 2023Article
- Pros and cons of streamlining and use of computerised clinical decision support systems to future-proof oncological multidisciplinary team meetings.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Shared-Decision-Making Experiences in Breast Cancer Care with and without Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences: A Mixed-Methods-Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Registered nurses' views on consideration of patient perspectives during multidisciplinary team meetings in cancer care.BMC nursing · 2022Article
- How shared is decision-making in multidisciplinary tumour conferences with patient participation? An observational study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Observational
- Physicians' perceptions of patient participation and the involvement of family caregivers in the palliative care pathway.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-centeredness is essential in complex oncological multidisciplinary team decision-making. Improvement seems to be needed, while there is a lack of knowledge about health care providers' needs for improvement.
objectiveTo explore multidisciplinary team members' perspectives on the need to improve patient-centeredness in complex decision-making, and subsequently the strategies to enhance it.
methodsThis was a qualitative descriptive interview study. The participants were twenty-four professionals who attended multidisciplinary cancer team meetings weekly. The setting was five multidisciplinary teams (gastrointestinal, gynecological, urological, head and neck, and hematological cancer) in a Dutch academic hospital. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and were analyzed with a combination of inductive and deductive content analysis.
resultsThe participants voiced the need for additional information (patient-centered information, patients's needs and preferences, individualized medical information) during the multidisciplinary team meeting, to be more patient-centered in the decision-making conversation with the patient following the meeting, and for more information following the meeting to support patient-centeredness. The strategies, which mostly originated from the needs, were categorized as organization, decision-making, and communication. The most prominent strategies were those aimed at collecting and using patient-centered information, and to facilitate the decision-making conversation with the patient following the multidisciplinary team meeting.
conclusionOur findings highlighted the need to improve patient-centeredness in oncological multidisciplinary teams and provided a comprehensive overview of strategies for improvement, supported by multidisciplinary team members. These strategies emphasize involvement of patients throughout the continuous process of decision-making for patients with cancer. These strategies may be implemented in other oncological multidisciplinary teams, taking in mind the local needs. Future research may help to prioritize the strategies and to determine and evaluate the effect on endpoints, like patient or professional satisfaction, shared decision-making, and on the decision that was made.
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.