Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39045648›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2024

Clinical ethics consultation services: public-facing information on NCI-designated cancer center websites.

Erica Koranteng, Colin Cernik, Erin Gallagher, Andrew Hantel, Jonathan Marron, Gregory Abel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Erica KorantengDivision of Population Sciences, Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1332-0383
Colin CernikDivision of Population Sciences, Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.
Erin GallagherDivision of Population Sciences, Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.
Andrew HantelDivision of Population Sciences, Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9612-3643
Jonathan MarronHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Gregory AbelDivision of Population Sciences, Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1100-2813

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical ethics consultation services (CECS) can be particularly complex in oncology, and widespread misconceptions exist about their nature. As a result, visibility and accessibility of information regarding CECS is critical. We investigated the availability and content of information regarding CECS on websites of NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and cancer centers (CCs). Each website was reviewed for information on CECS and reviewed for benchmarks partially derived from the American Society of Bioethics and Humanities recommendations for CECS. Our analysis revealed that of 70 NCI-designated center websites, 38 had information on CECS, and 17 were found directly on these sites. When CECS information was available, most websites provided a mission statement (71%) and an explanation of what constitutes an ethics consult (74%). Few provided a description of the consult process (45%) or service membership (39%). Our findings reveal a significant gap in CECS visibility on the websites of NCI-designated CCs.

Indexed as

InternetNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)Cancer Care FacilitiesEthics ConsultationHumansNeoplasmsUnited StatesCCCsclinical ethics consultation servicescomprehensive cancer centerpatient carepublic information

Identifiers

PMID39045648
PMCPMC11449108

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.