ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2026
Impact of a Virtual Multidisciplinary Lymphoma Tumor Board on Clinical Decision-Making.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of a virtual multidisciplinary lymphoma tumor board on clinical decision-making over time. Patients and Methods: The Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board, part of the International Mayo Clinic Care Network, conducted a retrospective review of 722 cases from January 1, 2014 to July 31,2024. The process includes review of clinical history, radiology, and hematopathology. In March 2020, the board transitioned to a fully virtual format. Recommendations regarding radiology, pathology, and treatment were tracked to compare pre-COVID (January 2014-February 2020) and post-COVID (March 2020-July 2024) eras. Results: Of 722 cases, changes in care were identified in 423 patients. In the pre-COVID period (n=431), changes were recommended for 217 patients (50.3%, 217/431). Post-COVID (n=291), changes were recommended for 206 patients (70.8%, 206/291), representing a 40.6% relative increase (p < 0.001). Average recommendations per case rose from 0.64 (277/431) to 1.18 (343/291). Post-COVID increases were observed across all domains: radiologic interpretation changes rose from 2.1% (9/431) to 7.2% (21/291), pathologic diagnosis changes from 10.0% (43/431) to 18.6% (54/291), additional testing recommendations from 16.9% (73/431) to 29.2% (85/291), and clinical management alterations from 35.3% (152/431) to 62.9% (183/291). Conclusion: The transition to a Virtual Tumor Board format coincided with increased tumor board-driven recommendations affecting diagnostic interpretation and clinical management. These results illustrate the potential of Virtual Tumor Boards to improve collaborative decision-making and adapt to evolving clinical needs.
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.