ArticleScientific reports2026
Awareness and attitudes toward cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy among surgical and medical oncologists.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has become an established treatment for selected peritoneal surface malignancies. However, awareness, training exposure, and attitudes toward CRS-HIPEC vary among oncologic disciplines. This nation sample study aimed to assess and compare the knowledge, awareness, and perceptions of surgical and medical oncologists in Türkiye regarding CRS-HIPEC indications, benefits, and implementation. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted between July and December 2025 among certified surgical and medical oncologists. A 19-item questionnaire evaluated demographics, CRS-HIPEC training exposure, institutional practices, and attitudes using a five-point Likert scale. A total of 98 oncologists participated (50 surgical, 48 medical), corresponding to an overall response rate of 36.3%. HIPEC-related training was significantly more common among surgical oncologists (39/50, 78% vs 13/48, 27%; p < 0.001), as were higher self-rated knowledge levels (p < 0.001) and awareness of CRS-HIPEC indications (40/50, 80% vs 28/48, 58%; p = 0.035). Agreement with the statement that CRS-HIPEC improves survival in appropriately selected patients was also stronger among surgical oncologists (44/50, 88% vs 35/48, 73%; p = 0.006). Among medical oncologists, those participating in multidisciplinary tumor boards were more likely to agree with the survival benefit (p = 0.032). Overall, 92% of participants supported the need for a national CRS-HIPEC guideline or standardized protocol. Surgical oncologists report greater training exposure and stronger belief in the benefit of CRS-HIPEC; however, multidisciplinary collaboration enhances understanding and acceptance among medical oncologists. Unified national guidelines and structured training programs may help align perspectives and optimize multidisciplinary practice.
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.