Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37404961›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2023

Characterizing Different Multidisciplinary Team Models Implemented Within One Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Sara Alfieri, Cinzia Brunelli, Claudia Borreani, Giuseppe Capri, Martina Angi, Giulia V Bianchi, Silvia Lo Dico, Pierangelo Spada, Viviana Fusetti, Ernesto Zecca and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Multi-disciplinarity in cancer care: a call for a global framework to deliver equitable and effective supportive care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Sara Alfieri *Clinical Psychology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2183-240X
Cinzia Brunelli *Palliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3905-1289
Claudia BorreaniClinical Psychology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe CapriMedical Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Martina AngiGeneral Oncology Surgery 4, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Giulia V BianchiMedical Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Silvia Lo DicoPalliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Pierangelo SpadaNursing, Technicians and Rehabilitation Management Service (SITRA), Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Viviana FusettiPalliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Ernesto ZeccaPalliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Augusto CaraceniPalliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The multidisciplinary approach is considered "best practice" in oncology. Multidisciplinary Teamwork (MDTW) can be broadly classified into Multidisciplinary Team Meetings (MDTM) and Multidisciplinary Cancer Clinics (MDCC; involving also patients), yet both models are heterogeneously implemented. Purpose: This study aims at describing the different MDTW implemented models in a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Methods: All clinical unit directors of the hospital were contacted to identify any MDTW activities the personnel of the unit were involved in. Structured interviews were carried out to collect MDTWs information, ie, type (MDTM vs MDCC), team composition, aims, disease phase, use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Descriptive analyses and Social Network Analysis (SNA) were performed. Results: Among 38 structured interviews, 25 concerned MDTMs and 13 in MDCCs. Responders were mainly surgeons (35%) and oncologists (29%), 35% of them were team leaders. Teams were mostly composed of physicians only (64% in MDTMs, 69% in MDCCs). Case managers (8% and 31%), palliative care specialists (12% and 23%) and psychologists (20% and 31%) were involved to a lesser extent, mainly when dealing with advanced disease. MDTWs were mainly aimed at integrating the skills of the different specialists (respectively 72% for MDTMs and 64% for MDCCs) and offering the best overall patient care pathway (64%, 61.5%). MDTWs were directed at patients in both diagnostic (72%, 61.5%) and locally advanced/metastatic (32%, 38.4%) disease. PROMs were seldom used (24%, 23%). SNA shows a similar density in the two MDTWs, but in the MDCCs two nodes remain isolated (pathologists and radiologists). Conclusion: Despite a high number of MDTWs for advanced/metastatic disease, there is limited involvement of palliative care specialists, psychologists, and nurses.

Indexed as

case conferencesmultidisciplinary cancer conferencesmultidisciplinary visitsoncologytumor boardtumor conferences

Identifiers

PMID37404961
PMCPMC10317525

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.