ArticleBMC health services research2026
Revealing the gaps: unwarranted variations and multidisciplinary solutions in Victorian oesophagogastric cancer care - A mixed-methods analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn unwarranted variation in cancer care and/or outcome is a disparity that is not explained by differences in patient illness or preferences. The Victorian Integrated Cancer Services (VICS) Optimal Care Summits program identifies unwarranted variations against the standards and targets determined in the Optimal Care Pathways (OCP). The program explores the causes of unwarranted variations and identifies clinician and consumer informed improvement priorities. Addressing unwarranted variations in cancer care is challenging, but critical to promoting health equity. This study aimed to determine priority unwarranted variations and targeted action in oesophagogastric cancer (OG) care across Victoria, Australia.
methodsDuring 2023–2024, a mixed methods strategic consultation approach with Victorian OG multidisciplinary stakeholders was applied. It included: rapid literature review and environmental scan; barriers, enablers, and preferences survey of multidisciplinary clinicians; consumer experience reporting; analysis of 2012–2021 linked cancer administrative datasets; and implementation of a Delphi survey to prioritise unwarranted variations to be discussed at a summit event, identification of improvement priorities and action plan. Qualitative data was subject to thematic analysis and quantitative data was subject to descriptive statistical analysis. Both data were then synthesised.
resultsTwenty unwarranted variations in OG cancer care and/or outcome were identified and three were prioritised for discussion at the summit event: differing survival among patients living in one regional area, compared to the statewide average, for gastric cancer; variations in time from diagnosis to patients receiving any treatment within 6 weeks for non-metastatic oesophageal cancer; and low rates of OG cancer surgical and/or chemotherapy patients being seen by a dietitian within 3 months of diagnosis. The summit identified causes and produced a statewide action register, prioritising improvements by impact and resources required.
conclusionThis novel mixed methods approach demonstrates an effective strategy for identification of patient perspectives and data-informed unwarranted variations, causes and improvement initiatives for action to promote alignment with tumour specific OCPs.
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.