Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36960976›Full record

ArticleThe Australasian journal of dermatology2023

Measuring the quality of skin cancer management in primary care: A scoping review.

Samantha Spanos, Nehal Singh, Bela I Laginha, Gaston Arnolda, David Wilkinson, Andrea L Smith, Anne E Cust, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Frances Rapport

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Australasian journal of dermatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Samantha SpanosCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3734-3907
Nehal SinghCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Bela I LaginhaCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Gaston ArnoldaCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
David WilkinsonCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Andrea L SmithThe Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Anne E CustThe Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Frances RapportCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Macquarie University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUCancer Council Queensland · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Skin Cancer Centres
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skin cancer is a growing global problem and a significant health and economic burden. Despite the practical necessity for skin cancer to be managed in primary care settings, little is known about how quality of care is or should be measured in this setting. This scoping review aimed to capture the breadth and range of contemporary evidence related to the measurement of quality in skin cancer management in primary care settings. Six databases were searched for relevant texts reporting on quality measurement in primary care skin cancer management. Data from 46 texts published since 2011 were extracted, and quality measures were catalogued according to the three domains of the Donabedian model of healthcare quality (structure, process and outcome). Quality measures within each domain were inductively analysed into 13 key emergent groups. These represented what were deemed to be the most relevant components of skin cancer management as related to structure, process or outcomes measurement. Four groups related to the structural elements of care provision (e.g. diagnostic tools and equipment), five related to the process of care delivery (e.g. diagnostic processes) and four related to the outcomes of care (e.g. poor treatment outcomes). A broad range of quality measures have been documented, based predominantly on articles using retrospective cohort designs; systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials were limited.

Indexed as

Skin NeoplasmsHumansPrimary Health CareRetrospective Studiesgeneral practitionersprimary carequalityquality in healthcarequality measurementskin cancerskin cancer managementvariation

Identifiers

PMID36960976
PMCPMC10952799
OpenAlexW4360816575

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.