Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34247596›Full record

ReviewBMC medical informatics and decision making2021

Creation of clinical algorithms for decision-making in oncology: an example with dose prescription in radiation oncology.

Fabio Dennstädt, Theresa Treffers, Thomas Iseli, Cédric Panje, Paul Martin Putora

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

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

5 authors.

Fabio DennstädtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacherstrasse 95, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland. fabio.dennstaedt@kssg.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-5374-8720
Theresa TreffersSeeburg Castle University, Seekirchen am Wallersee, Austria.
Thomas IseliDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacherstrasse 95, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Cédric PanjeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacherstrasse 95, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Paul Martin PutoraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacherstrasse 95, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In oncology, decision-making in individual situations is often very complex. To deal with such complexity, people tend to reduce it by relying on their initial intuition. The downside of this intuitive, subjective way of decision-making is that it is prone to cognitive and emotional biases such as overestimating the quality of its judgements or being influenced by one's current mood. Hence, clinical predictions based on intuition often turn out to be wrong and to be outperformed by statistical predictions. Structuring and objectivizing oncological decision-making may thus overcome some of these issues and have advantages such as avoidance of unwarranted clinical practice variance or error-prevention. Even for uncertain situations with limited medical evidence available or controversies about the best treatment option, structured decision-making approaches like clinical algorithms could outperform intuitive decision-making. However, the idea of such algorithms is not to prescribe the clinician which decision to make nor to abolish medical judgement, but to support physicians in making decisions in a systematic and structured manner. An example for a use-case scenario where such an approach may be feasible is the selection of treatment dose in radiation oncology. In this paper, we will describe how a clinical algorithm for selection of a fractionation scheme for palliative irradiation of bone metastases can be created. We explain which steps in the creation process of a clinical algorithm for supporting decision-making need to be  performed and which challenges and limitations have to be considered.

Indexed as

Radiation OncologyAlgorithmsDecision MakingHumansIntuitionPrescriptionsBone metastasesClinical algorithmDecision-makingDecision strategyDose prescriptionRadiation oncology

Identifiers

PMID34247596
PMCPMC8274051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.