ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2026
Healthcare stakeholders' perspectives on coordinating cancer diagnosis in Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador.
Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore healthcare stakeholders' experiences of care coordination during cancer diagnosis in Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador, including how these experiences are influenced by factors related to the countries' public subsystems. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted based on 115 semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals and administrative personnel in both primary care ( Results: The analysis points to limited transfer of clinical information causing repeated tests as well as poor clinical management coordination in terms of delayed referrals from primary care and restricted access to specialized care, altogether contributing to diagnostic delays. Self-reinforcing loops of barriers for care coordination included fragmented clinical information systems, poor skills and training among healthcare professionals, as well as insufficient diagnostic equipment in all three study countries, scarcity of specialized healthcare professionals and functioning of the prioritization system for certain cancers in Chile, and working conditions and insurance companies' management of care in Colombia. Informal communication strategies and personal networks emerged as adaptive responses to these challenges, facilitating coordination in some cases but also risking data security and consistency in care. Conclusions: The study highlights the urgent need for political prioritization of cancer care coordination, including investments in unified clinical record systems, training of healthcare professionals, and diagnostic infrastructure. It also emphasizes the importance of recognizing healthcare stakeholders' responses to barriers.
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.