ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025
Quality assessment of clinical practice in neuro-oncology.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we aimed to improve patient care for central nervous system conditions based on the 2021 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Performance measures were used to enhance team accountability and address challenges due to limited evaluate to health insurance and variations in clinical staff decision-making. Rehabilitation and observed variability in surgical costs were not measured in this study. Similar studies were also referenced, and improvements in real-time glioma management were suggested. Performance measures and standardizing practices were recommended to improve cost predictability despite the observed cost variability caused by individualized care. ■ The molecular test according to the WHO classification of CNS tumors (gliomas) was performed in 100% (172) of patients. ■ Education on chemotherapy and informed consent for patients with brain tumors was carried out for 100% (130) of the patients who had an indication for chemotherapy treatment. ■ Approximately 87% of the patients with gliomas underwent postoperative cranial MRI. ■ A multidisciplinary approach, including molecular testing, was used for 35% of patients with glioma. ■ Thromboembolic events after resection of the primary brain tumor occurred in only 0.84% (3) patients.
objectiveTo evaluate the quality indicators proposed by the American Academy of Neurology and Neuro-oncology Society in patients with primary intracranial central nervous system tumors.
methodsThis study is a retrospective level I analysis that used electronic medical records from the CERNER system and GDOC-SAME at the tertiary hospital. It was approved by the Research Ethics Committee and followed the Declaration of Helsinki. Data was collected and analyzed confidentially via REDCap. The research focused on patients 18 or older with primary central nervous system tumors who had surgery from August 2015 to August 2021. It excluded surgeries performed elsewhere, reoperations, secondary (metastatic) tumors, and primary central nervous system tumors outside the cranium.
resultsThe results showed that 48% of the patients had gliomas, whereas 30 and 21.6% had meningiomas and other types of tumors. Quality measures showed that 35% of the patients with grade 2-4 tumors had multidisciplinary care plan discussions. All patients with gliomas underwent molecular testing and those eligible who underwent chemotherapy were educated and provided informed consent. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging within 72h was performed in 87% of gliomas. The length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status at discharge, and 30-day status were also potential quality measures. However, for meningioma cases, readmissions were associated with patients in the American Society of Anesthesiologists II (58.33%) and American Society of Anesthesiologists III-IV (41.67%).
conclusionThe study conclusions revealed that adherence to quality indicators was good; however, improvements are needed in multidisciplinary care plans and postoperative imaging. Quality measures can be enhanced by controlling factors such as American Society of Anesthesiologists and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scales at admission, epileptic seizure occurrence, neurological deficits, and tumor size in meningiomas. The study's findings highlighted the importance of quality improvement programs for optimal medical 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.