ArticlePloS one2026
Determining essential priorities for future investigation - A national consensus exercise in Interventional Oncology (DEFINE-IO) - An a priori protocol.
Article in PloS one, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInterventional Oncology (IO) is a rapidly developing subspecialty within interventional radiology (IR), offering minimally invasive, precise and targeted cancer therapies. Despite its transformative potential, IO faces challenges in identifying critical research priorities amidst limited funding and resources. The DEFINE-IO study aims to identify the most pressing research priorities in IO to guide researchers, policy makers, and funding bodies in driving innovation and improving cancer outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study comprises two phases: a modified e-Delphi process and a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). The e-Delphi process will involve three rounds, with round 1 dedicated to generating research topics, followed by rounds 2 and 3, which will focus on refining and achieving consensus on the identified topics. The final consensus will yield a list of 25 research priorities, which will be evaluated during an in-person MCDA session. These priorities will be assessed against three predefined criteria: urgency, feasibility/equipoise, and affordability, to establish a strategic roadmap for research in IO. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethics approval was deemed not necessary. Findings of the study will be presented at major conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings will also be shared with funding bodies and policymakers to help guide future research directions.
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.