ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Disruptions and Comprehensiveness of Patient Information in Multidisciplinary Virtual Tumor Boards: An Observational Study in Thoracic Cancer Care.
Article in Annals of surgical 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVirtual multidisciplinary tumor boards (vMTBs) support oncologic care, but their real-world operational dynamics and how interdisciplinary interactions unfold are insufficiently characterized. Flow disruptions may interrupt communication and information exchange, potentially undermining efficient workflow and quality of clinical decisions.
methodsThis study investigated whether flow disruptions are associated with changes in information comprehensiveness during vMTBs in a thoracic cancer network. In an observational study, three trained observers monitored routine vMTB sessions and applied standardized tools to document, for each patient case, the occurrence and type of flow disruptions and to rate information comprehensiveness. The study used bi- and multivariable analyses, adjusting for relevant case- and session-level confounders, including case length and image presentation.
resultsThe study included 146 registered patient cases and identified 392 flow disruptions (mean, 3.77 ± 3.08 per case). The most frequent disruption categories were audio quality issues (33.9%), impaired image visualization (27.6%), and difficulties in information retrieval and exchange (24.2%). In multivariable models, flow disruptions due to off-topic questions and issues attributable to the vMTB software were associated with lower information comprehensiveness, whereas flow disruptions related to poor visualization were associated with higher comprehensiveness.
conclusionFlow disruptions are common in vMTBs, and their impact varies by disruption type. These findings highlight actionable leverage points, particularly optimizing audio/visual clarity and improving software-supported information exchange, to strengthen information completeness relevant to surgical decision-making. Future studies should relate these workflow measures to clinical outcomes to investigate downstream effects of inefficient communication patterns in distributed tumor board settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42829409What 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.