Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39253352›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024

Tools and Strategies to Integrate Multi-Domain Information for Personalized Decision-Making in Oncological Care Pathways: A Scoping Review.

Thanee M Uittenhout, Jesse Jansen, Kon-Siong Jie, Lieke Welling, Barbara L van Leeuwen, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Anne M Stiggelbout, Trudy van der Weijden, IPTO Consortium, IPTO Consortium: the scientific members of the IPTO Consortium

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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. 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

10 authors.

Thanee M UittenhoutDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML) Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3864-4325
Jesse JansenDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML) Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7739-0049
Kon-Siong JieDepartment of Internal Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands.
Lieke WellingDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Barbara L van LeeuwenDepartment of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6745-4424
Leti van Bodegom-VosDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8486-6404
Anne M StiggelboutDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6293-4509
Trudy van der WeijdenDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML) Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7469-3781
IPTO Consortium
IPTO Consortium: the scientific members of the IPTO Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is a growing interest in personalized decision-making in oncology. According to the Integrated Oncological Decision-Making Model (IODM), decisions should be based on information from three domains: (1) medical technical information, (2) patients' general health status and (3) patients' preferences and goals. Little is known about what kind of tool/strategy is used to collect the information, by whom this is collected (nurse, clinician) when this is collected (moment in the care pathway), and how this information should be collected and integrated within decision-making in oncological care pathways, and what its impact is. Methods: We searched PUBMED, Embase and Web of Science in October 2023 for studies looking at tools to collect and integrate information from the three domains of the IODM. We extracted data on the content and implementation of these tools, and on decision and patient outcomes. Results: The search yielded 2576 publications, of which only seven studies described collection of information from all three domains (inclusion criteria). In the seven included studies, information on the three domains was collected through dialogue, questionnaires, and assessments (what) by a nurse (2 out of 7 studies) or by other members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team (by whom) (5 out of 7 studies). Members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team subsequently integrated the information (5 out 7 studies) during their meeting (when), with patients and family attending this meeting in 2 studies (how). In terms of decision outcomes, 5 out of 7 studies compared the treatment recommendations before and after implementation of the tools, showing a modification of the treatment plan in 3% to 53% of cases. The limited data on patient outcomes suggest positive effects on well-being and fewer complications (3 out of 7 studies). Conclusion: The seven studies identified that integrated information from the three IODM domains into treatment decision-making lacked comprehensive information regarding the strategies, process, timing and individuals involved in implementing the tools. Nevertheless, the few studies that looked at patient outcomes showed promising findings.

Indexed as

multi-disciplinary teamoncologypatient centred carepatient preferencesperson centred caretreatment decision-making

Identifiers

PMID39253352
PMCPMC11381674

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.