ArticleHead & neck2025
Visual pathology reports for improved collaboration at multidisciplinary head and neck tumor board.
Article in Head & neck, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual Patient-Specific 3-Dimensional Specimen Maps for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Planning in Mucosal Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- MarginView3D: A Novel Software Enabling Comprehensive Three-Dimensional Surgical Pathology Documentation for Improved Intra- and Postoperative Cancer Care.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Visual pathology reports for improved collaboration at multidisciplinary head and neck tumor board.Head & neck · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMultidisciplinary tumor boards (TB) are the standard for discussing complex head and neck cancer cases. During TB, imaging and microscopic pathology is reviewed, but there is typically no visualization of the resected cancer.
methodsA pilot study was conducted to investigate the utility of visual pathology reports at weekly TB for 10 consecutive weeks. Faculty-level participants completed a pre-survey and post-survey to assess understanding of resected cancer specimens.
resultsProviders (n = 25) across seven medical specialties completed pre-survey and post-survey. Following intervention, providers reported significant improvement in understanding of anatomic orientation of the specimen and sites of margin sampling (mean 47.4-96.1, p < 0.001), ability to locate the site of a positive margin (mean 69.5-91.1, p < 0.001), and confidence in treatment plans created (mean 69.5-89.2, p < 0.001) with the addition of visual pathology reports.
conclusionsVisual pathology reports improve provider understanding of resected cancer specimens at multidisciplinary TB.
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.