ArticleJCO global oncology2026
Contextual Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration and Rapid Onsite Evaluation in a Resource-Limited Setting.
Article in JCO global oncology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFine-needle aspiration (FNA) is an inexpensive, minimally invasive tissue sampling method that is often the primary diagnostic procedure in low- and middle-income countries. Although FNA can yield highly accurate diagnostic samples when performed by skilled practitioners, inadequate training frequently leads to indeterminate, nondiagnostic, or false-negative results. The adequacy and accuracy of FNA can be significantly improved by using image guidance and rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE). This study assessed the barriers to and facilitators of ultrasound-guided FNA (USFNA) and ROSE at a national referral hospital in Tanzania.
methodsWe conducted situational analysis using semistructured interviews with multiple key stakeholders involved in cancer care, including pathologists, surgeons, interventional radiologists, laboratory scientists, and administrators. The prompts included questions about barriers and facilitators for implementing the USFNA and ROSE. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated, and coded using thematic context analysis, and major themes were identified.
resultsA total of 23 stakeholders were interviewed. Major barriers include the lack of standardized training for cytopathology, the need for new equipment and supplies, and the need to establish a new procedure payment structure for patients. Facilitators included access to global academic partnerships for subspecialty training, availability of cytotechnology training programs, and institutional motivation for change. Participants suggested establishing systematic training in cytopathology, an integrated patient referral pathway for USFNA, appointing an intervention champion, strengthening the cytopathology infrastructure and quality, and modifying payment structures.
conclusionMultidisciplinary stakeholder involvement, development of rigorous training programs, capacity strengthening of cytopathology infrastructure, and ability to bill for procedures will be critical for the successful adoption of USFNA and ROSE.
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.