The molecular tumor board: Ethical challenges and recommendations for practice
Onkologe, ISSN: 1433-0415, Vol: 26, Issue: 5, Page: 431-437
2020
- 3Citations
- 5Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
Background: Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs) play a pioneering key role in genomics-based precision medicine. Due to their novelty, interdisciplinarity and position at the interface between research and clinic, MTBs raise ethical, legal and social challenges. Objectives: The goal was to analyze ethical challenges and application-oriented recommendations. Methods: We describe the concept of a MTB and analyze the challenges through application of widely accepted principles of medical and research ethics. Conclusions: The MTB has a clinical function from which responsibilities of all parties involved arise. Challenges concerning responsibilities of involved parties, medical evidence, confidentiality, additional findings and data sharing need to be addressed in order to establish an ethically sound MTB.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85081733129&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6.pdf; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6/fulltext.html; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00761-020-00725-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know