ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Physician, patient, and caregiver support for a formal certification in pediatric neuro-oncology: A survey-based report from the SNO pediatrics working group.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives from neuro-oncology providers on patient access to electronic records: a survey study.CNS oncology · 2024Article
- Challenges and needs among pediatric oncology providers in caring for pediatric brain tumor patients and survivors: A qualitative study.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although CNS tumors are the most common pediatric cancer in the United States, most physicians caring for these patients are not formally certified in the subspecialty. To determine support for developing a formal certification process in pediatric neuro-oncology, the Society for Neuro-Oncology's Pediatrics Special Interest Track Training and Credentialing working group performed a cross-sectional survey-based study of physicians and patients/caregivers of children with a CNS tumor history. Methods: Surveys were built in Survey Monkey and were available for 3 months. The physician survey had 34 questions and was open to doctors currently caring for pediatric neuro-oncology patients. The patient/caregiver survey had 13 questions. Both surveys were completed anonymously. Results: The physician survey was completed by 193 participants, the majority of whom self-identified as oncologists. Only 5.6% of survey participants had ever been board-certified in neuro-oncology; the majority of participating physicians were either unaware that this certification existed or thought they were not eligible due to training in pediatrics rather than neurology or internal medicine. Almost half of the self-identified pediatric neuro-oncologists had not completed any specific clinical neuro-oncology training. Over 75% of physicians were supportive of the implementation of a formal certification process in pediatric neuro-oncology. A total of 30 participants completed the patient/caregiver survey. Although the majority of survey participants were highly satisfied with their oncologist, 70% would have been more comfortable if their oncologist had been specifically certified in pediatric neuro-oncology. Conclusions: There is support from physicians, patients, and caregivers to establish a formal certification process in pediatric neuro-oncology.
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.