ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2024
Constricting Gaps: Protocol development, implementation challenges and lessons learned for the
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Constricting Gaps: Protocol development, implementation challenges and lessons learned for theContemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with advanced cancer experience many symptoms and needs requiring a Palliative Care Intervention (PCI). Identifying gaps between needs for PCIs and experienced delivery may improve health care, furthermore the association of gaps with quality indicators (QI). The multicentre Romanian (RO)-Swiss (CH) reality map study implemented a novel protocol based on needs concepts and culturally adapted quality indicators (QI). Methods: An interactive mapping guide measuring unmet needs for PCIs monthly over six months, patient characteristics (cognition, EAPC basic data set, Cofactors) and QI (Inappropriate Anticancer Treatment, High Symptom Burden [IPOS, EQ5D], Repeated ER Admissions, Aggressive End-of-Life Care, and Quality of Death-and-Dying) were developed, applying swiss standards for quality assurance. A composite endpoint (QI, cofactors) was planned. Finally, local solutions responding to gaps were piloted. Results: From 308 patients (RO: 262, CH: 46, age 62j [mean], 74 % ECOG PS 1&2, 81 % current anticancer treatment) baseline and first follow-up data revealed main gaps (symptom management, spiritual needs, family support), country differences (e.g. illness understanding, spiritual needs) and a significant association of the number of gaps with depression. Later data become less, and data quality on QI variable, revealing gaps in research conduct competences, resources, and applicability of over-sophisticated quality assurance tools. Nevertheless, the unmet needs data promoted local initiatives, 81 patients participated in feasibility studies. Finally, the joint experience stimulated academic developments and national integration of palliative care into oncology. Conclusions: Pairing motivation and enthusiasm with more modest aims, feasibility testing of all outcomes and investment in research competences may disperse gaps.
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.