ArticleHealth science reports2026
A Dual-Perspective Comparison of Classical and Clinic-Based Multidisciplinary Team Models in Cancer Care: A Cross-Sectional and Qualitative Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) represent a key trend in global cancer care. This study aims to discuss the applicability and benefits of two MDT models in a Chinese tertiary cancer hospital, the classical MDT consultation meeting model and the MDT clinic model, regarding process and efficiency, physicians' preferences, and patients' satisfaction. Methods: We conducted a user-side cross-sectional survey among patients in MDT clinics ( Results: Since 2005, the hospital has established 15 MDTs. The classical model, operating on a fixed schedule, is valued by physicians for educating young staff. Since 2020, MDT clinics in 8 disciplines have streamlined the appointment process and involved patients directly in discussions. The majority of physicians (25/28) affirmed that this model has improved the efficiency of developing diagnostic and treatment plans. The overall satisfaction of patients with the MDT clinic was (4.66 ± 0.54), which was higher than their satisfaction with the classical MDT model (4.53 ± 0.53). In the MDT clinic model, non-local patients reported greater satisfaction (4.68 ± 0.58) than did local patients (4.65 ± 0.53), while the opposite was true of the classical MDT model. Patients with more complex tumor types ( Conclusion: For regional hubs featuring the necessary resources, the establishment of a multidisciplinary clinic model for diagnosis and treatment is strongly encouraged. The classical MDT meeting is indispensable for complex case deliberation and physician training, while the multidisciplinary clinic model can be utilized to enhance patient-centered care and satisfaction.
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.