ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023
360 Health Analysis (H360)-A Comparison of Key Performance Indicators in Breast Cancer Management across Health Institution Settings in Portugal.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality indicators of supportive care for patients with cancer undergoing treatment: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the breast cancer quality of care indicators in Iran; multicenter study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Sentinel node in breast cancer as an indicator of quality in medical care: Evaluation of statistics in Colombia.Breast disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe increased focus on quality indicators (QIs) and the use of clinical registries in real-world cancer studies have increased compliance with therapeutic standards and patient survival. The European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) established QIs to assess compliance with current standards in breast cancer care.
methodsThis retrospective study is part of H360 Health Analysis and aims to describe compliance with EUSOMA QIs in breast cancer management in different hospital settings (public vs. private; general hospitals vs. oncology centers). A set of key performance indicators (KPIs) was selected based on EUSOMA and previously identified QIs. Secondary data were retrieved from patients' clinical records. Compliance with target KPIs in different disease stages was compared with minimum and target EUSOMA standards.
resultsA total of 259 patient records were assessed. In stages I, II, and III, 18 KPIs met target EUSOMA standards, 5 met minimum standards, and 8 failed to meet minimum standards. Compliance with KPIs varied according to the type of hospital (particularly regarding diagnosis) and disease stage. Although small differences were found in KPI compliance among institutions, several statistical differences were found among treatment KPIs according to disease stage, particularly in stage III.
conclusionsThis study represents the first assessment of the quality of breast cancer care in different hospital settings in Portugal and shows that, although most QIs meet EUSOMA standards, there is room for improvement. Differences have been found across institutions, particularly between oncology centers and general hospitals, in diagnosis and compliance with KPIs among disease stages. Stage III showed the greatest variability in compliance with treatment KPIs, probably related to the lower specificity of the guidelines in this disease stage.
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.