Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39514644›Full record

ArticleArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2025

Adherence to Synoptic Cancer Pathology Reporting Among Pathologists in the National Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

Abdol Aziz Ould Ismail, Soham Kale, Kathryn McGonagle, Brent Hill, Jason R Pettus, Scott L DuVall, Jeffrey P Ferraro, Florian R Schroeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2025. 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

8 authors.

Abdol Aziz Ould IsmailFrom the White River Junction VA Healthcare System, White River Junction, Vermont (Ould Ismail, Kale, McGonagle, Schroeck).
Soham KaleFrom the White River Junction VA Healthcare System, White River Junction, Vermont (Ould Ismail, Kale, McGonagle, Schroeck).
Kathryn McGonagleFrom the White River Junction VA Healthcare System, White River Junction, Vermont (Ould Ismail, Kale, McGonagle, Schroeck).
Brent Hillthe Salt Lake City VA Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah (Hill, DuVall, Ferraro).
Jason R Pettusthe Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Ould Ismail, Pettus), Section of Urology (Schroeck), and Dartmouth Cancer Center (Schroeck), Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Scott L DuVallthe Salt Lake City VA Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah (Hill, DuVall, Ferraro).
Jeffrey P Ferrarothe Salt Lake City VA Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah (Hill, DuVall, Ferraro).
Florian R SchroeckFrom the White River Junction VA Healthcare System, White River Junction, Vermont (Ould Ismail, Kale, McGonagle, Schroeck).

Funding

HSRD VA I01 HX002780
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CONTEXT.—: Quality communication between clinicians and pathologists is required for optimal cancer care. The College of American Pathologists provides anatomic site-specific cancer protocols that facilitate synoptic reporting for efficient communication, contributing to accuracy and completeness of cancer staging. OBJECTIVE.—: To evaluate synoptic cancer pathology reporting across the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the largest integrated health system in the United States, for 4 common cancers: melanoma and colon, bladder, and kidney cancer. DESIGN.—: For each cancer type, we investigated at least 200 biopsy and 200 resection reports from 2019 to 2021. In each report, we determined whether a synoptic format was used. The reports were selected using random sampling across all VA health care facilities. We also identified a set of core elements that were underdocumented. RESULTS.—: Among 1618 pathology reports, 778 (48%; 95% CI, 46%-50%) were synoptic reports. Synoptic reporting was much more common among resections (621 of 811; 77%; 95% CI, 74%-79%) than among biopsies (157 of 807; 19%; 95% CI, 17%-22%). It was most common in colorectal resections (200 of 206; 97%; 95% CI, 94%-99%) and least common in colon biopsy reports (1 of 200; 0.5%; 95% CI, 0%-3%). Core elements that were underdocumented included procedure and regional lymph nodes for resections of bladder and kidney cancer and of melanoma. CONCLUSIONS.—: Synoptic reporting was used about three-quarters of the time for resections and about 1 in 5 times for biopsies. Future work should develop implementation strategies to improve synoptic reporting, especially for biopsy specimens and core elements that were relatively underdocumented.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherenceNeoplasmsPathologistsPathology, ClinicalBiopsyHumansPathology, SurgicalUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs

Identifiers

PMID39514644
PMCPMC12182258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.