ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2025
Analysis of radiation oncology integration within general practitioners' daily patient care: a cross-sectional survey in Germany.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 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.
- From radiation beams to digital streams: social media engagement of German radiotherapy facilities.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- The Evolving Role of Radiation Oncology in the Management of Uterine Cervical Carcinoma: A State-of-the-Art Review for Non-Radiation Oncologists.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Travel distance and potential disparities in palliative radiotherapy access for cancer patients in Victoria, Australia.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGeneral practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in providing interdisciplinary care for radiation oncology patients. This study aims to understand the specific needs and challenges faced by general practitioners in Germany when treating oncology patients.
methodsA comprehensive web-based questionnaire with 24 items was disseminated to GPs in Germany via email using survio.com. The survey collected data on demographics, qualifications, clinical experiences, decision-making involvement, and symptom recognition. It specifically examined post-radiotherapy care and the use of specialized palliative homecare networks (SAPV). Statistical analyses were descriptive. The survey was open from July 4 to August 9, 2023.
resultsA notable majority of general practitioners displayed confidence in their understanding of cancer-related symptoms, with over half (54.6%) rating their knowledge with 4 out of 5. This level of self-assessed expertise extended to their capacity to address the needs of cancer patients (53.8%), although 67% express a need for further education in specifically radiotherapeutic side effects. Satisfaction with SAPV networks was high, and 72.3% of respondents were actively involved in palliative care, compared to only 45.6% in managing radiation therapy. Notable challenges included inadequate communication with specialists, insufficient staffing, and under-recognition of GPs' roles in oncology care.
conclusionThe study highlights a paradox where GPs show high engagement in palliative care but limited involvement in radiation therapy management due to communication gaps and professional development needs. Addressing these disparities through targeted initiatives and fostering a collaborative care model is essential to amplify the important role of GPs, ensuring more integrated and effective patient care.
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.