ArticleCureus2023
Compliance of Interventional Radiologists With Interventional Oncology Accreditation Standards.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to evaluate interventional radiologists' compliance with patient care and the quality management process of cancer patients using a national survey.
methodsAn electronic survey was designed with questions derived from the core criteria of the International Accreditation System for Interventional Oncology (IASIOS), with the approval of the IASIOS council. Among the interventional radiologists contacted by e-mail through the national association, 34 responded to the questionnaire. The agreement of the participants with the core requirements was evaluated in five questions consisting of 34 articles using the 5-point Likert scale.
resultsRegarding the years of experience in interventional radiology (IR), the mean scale for the less than five-year group was 118.4, while that for the group with more than 15 years was 145.17 (p = 0.030). The mean scale of the five- to 15-year-old group was 121.75, versus that of more than 15 years, which was 145.17 (p = 0.028). Thus, significant differences arose between <five years versus >15 years and five to 15 years versus >15 years groups; later groups were more likely to comply. There was also a statistical difference between the groups formed according to the ratio of oncological interventions (<25% vs. 25%-50%) in the daily workload (p = 0.010).
conclusionIncreased experience in IR and more relay on oncological interventions appear to augment compliance with the IASIOS criteria. We believe that interventional radiologists who have distinct territorial praxis could benefit from such a framework with improved self-awareness.
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.