ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
Towards Agility in Breast Cancer Treatment Principles as Adopted from Agile Software Engineering.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- JURNI (Journeying with Patients' Understanding and Responding to Needs Interactively): An In-Hospital Navigation Application for Timely Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer at the University Malaya Medical Centre.Health services insights · 2024Article
- Bridging the digital readiness gap in palliative home care: A process to data approach.Digital healthArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The complex nature of breast cancer demands flexible and adaptable principles that can account for the diverse characteristics and evolving conditions of each patient. However, there are no common breast cancer treatment agility principles that can influence policies and direct breast cancer professionals and healthcare providers into enhancing the delivery of health outcomes to patients under these conditions along with continuous rapid improvements in breast cancer treatment plan design. The incorporation of agile principles from software engineering offers a promising avenue for enhancing patient care. This research is conducted to identify breast cancer treatment agility principles adopted from the software engineering field and to validate their conformance to agility through work reported from literature in breast cancer treatment context. Material and Methods: The authors applied a structured research methodology that involved interviews for eliciting and validating twelve agility principles from oncologists. Discussion of each principle is reflected using work reported from literature as a form of validation. Finally, a domain expert reviewed the literature-driven validation for each of the twelve identified breast cancer treatment agile principle to finally validate their conformance to agility and provide results. Results: This work resulted twelve validated agility principles for breast cancer treatment and classified whether they are meeting, partially-(hybrid), or not meeting agility. Seven out of the twelve agile principles resulted as meeting agility, where the remaining five principles resulted as partially meeting agility. None of them is recorded as not meeting agility. Conclusion: The work contributes to forming an agile mindset that can empower breast cancer professionals to optimize treatment plans, enhance patient experiences, and continuously improve the quality of care. The twelve identified agile principles are anticipated to contribute to driving more efficient oncology practices, policies, and protocols. It is concluded that the breast cancer treatment agility principles are not limited to twelve.
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.