Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36523215›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Examining interprofessional collaboration in oncogenetic service delivery models for hereditary cancers: a scoping review protocol.

Maria Eugenia Espinoza Moya, Jason Robert Guertin, Michel Dorval, Julie Lapointe, Karine Bouchard, Hermann Nabi, Maude Laberge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Maria Eugenia Espinoza MoyaPopulation Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6113-3048
Jason Robert GuertinPopulation Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1718-5307
Michel DorvalOncology Division, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3207-8211
Julie LapointeOncology Division, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Karine BouchardDépartement de cancérologie, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Hermann NabiDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7832-0413
Maude LabergePopulation Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada maude.laberge@fsa.ulaval.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-1274-136X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn a context of limited genetic specialists, collaborative models have been proposed to ensure timely access to high quality oncogenetic services for individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility. Yet, extensive variability in the terminology used and lack of a clear understanding of how interprofessional collaboration is operationalised and evaluated currently constrains the development of a robust evidence base on the value of different approaches used to optimise access to these services. To fill in this knowledge gap, this scoping review aims to systematically unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed by these interventions, and synthesise the evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, a comprehensive literature search will be conducted to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature on collaborative models used for adult patients with, or at increased risk of, hereditary breast, ovarian, colorectal and prostate cancers. An initial search was developed for Medline, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Cochrane and Web of Science on 13 June 2022 and will be complemented by searches in Google and relevant websites. Documents describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of these interventions will be considered for inclusion. Results will be summarised descriptively and used to compare relevant model characteristics and synthesise evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. This process is expected to guide the development of a definition and typology of collaborative models in oncogenetics that could help strengthen the knowledge base on these interventions. Moreover, because we will be mapping the existing evidence on collaborative models in oncogenetics, the proposed review will help us identify areas where additional research might be needed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research does not require ethics approval. Results from this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles and conferences.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsResearch DesignHumansMalePeer ReviewScoping Reviews as TopicSpecializationAdult oncologyCancer geneticsOrganisation of health services

Identifiers

PMID36523215
PMCPMC9748975

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.