ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2022
Hospital-based multidisciplinary lung cancer care in Australia: a survey of the landscape in 2021.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumour boards and their quality of structures, processes, and team performance in multidisciplinary cancer care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Guideline concordance of stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer treatment in the Australian setting.Internal medicine journal · 2026Article
- Advances and Future Perspectives for the Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Australia: A Narrative Review.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Effects of Multi-Role Collaborative Palliative Care on Anxiety, Cancer-Related Fatigue, and Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer.Actas espanolas de psiquiatria · 2026Article
- The role and synergistic mechanisms of clinical nurse specialists in cancer multidisciplinary treatment in China: a narrative review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- The Impact of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings on the Survival of Stage IV NSCLC Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Understanding the effectiveness and quality of virtual cancer multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs): a systematic scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Patient- and Areal-Level Risk Factors Associated With Lung Cancer Mortality in Victoria, Australia: A Bayesian Spatial Survival Analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and progressive pulmonary fibrosis: A position statement from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand 2023 revision.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2024Article
- Improving the quality of patient care in lung cancer: key factors for successful multidisciplinary team working.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2024Review
- Lung cancer: progress with prognosis and the changing state of play.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Article
- Developing an Integrated Service Planning Tool: Lessons Learnt from Planning the WSLHD Thoracic Oncology Program.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Australia and has the highest cancer burden. Numerous reports describe variations in lung cancer care and outcomes across Australia. There are no data assessing compliance with treatment guidelines and little is known about lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) infrastructure around Australia.
methodsClinicians from institutions treating lung cancer were invited to complete an online survey regarding the local infrastructure for lung cancer care and contemporary issues affecting lung cancer.
resultsResponses from 79 separate institutions were obtained representing 72% of all known institutions treating lung cancer in Australia. Most (93.6%) held a regular MDT meeting although recommended core membership was only achieved for 42/73 (57.5%) sites. There was no thoracic surgery representation in 17/73 (23.3%) of MDTs and surgery was less represented in regional and low case volume centres. Specialist nurses were present in just 37/79 (46.8%) of all sites. Access to diagnostic and treatment facilities was limited for some institutions. IT infrastructure was variable and most sites (69%) do not perform regular audits against guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic has driven most sites to incorporate virtual MDT meetings, with variable impact around the country. Clinician support for a national data-driven approach to improving lung cancer care was unanimous. DISCUSSION: This survey demonstrates variations in infrastructure support, provision and membership of lung cancer MDTs, in particular thoracic surgery and specialist lung cancer nurses. This heterogeneity may contribute to some of the well-documented variations in lung cancer outcomes in Australia.
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.