ArticleEcancermedicalscience2026
Use of comprehensive geriatric assessment among oncologists in Uruguay: perceptions, practices and barriers.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Population ageing has increased the proportion of older adults with cancer, a group characterised by high comorbidity burden and marked clinical heterogeneity. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is recommended by international guidelines to identify vulnerabilities and guide safer, more personalised treatment decisions. However, its implementation remains limited, and there is scarce information about its use in Uruguay. Objective: To describe perceptions, practices and barriers regarding the use of CGA among oncologists and trainees in Uruguay. Materials and Methods: We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study using an anonymous electronic questionnaire. Medical oncologists, radiation oncologists and physicians in training (postgraduate oncology training) involved in the clinical care of patients with cancer were included. A descriptive analysis was performed, and chi-square tests were used to compare frequencies between groups ( Results: A total of 60 physicians responded, representing approximately 60% of the national oncology community. Although 55% reported being familiar with the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline, only 31.7% reported using formal CGA tools, and just 11.7% applied CGA routinely. Informal evaluation based on clinical judgement predominated. Functional status was the most frequently assessed domain (79%), while physical performance was the least used (>70% never or almost never). Participants familiar with the guideline assessed life expectancy and cognition more frequently, with statistically significant differences (p = 0.048). The most commonly reported barriers were lack of resources for referral, limited physical space and insufficient training. Among those unfamiliar with the guideline, perceived limited evidence and uncertainty about which tool to use were predominant barriers. Conclusions: CGA use in Uruguay is low, revealing a substantial gap between knowledge and implementation. The identified barriers highlight the need to strengthen training, improve available resources and promote institutional strategies to support CGA integration, with the aim of improving care for older adults with cancer.
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.