Supportive care practice: Do we need guidelines?
Current Opinion in Oncology, ISSN: 1531-703X, Vol: 33, Issue: 4, Page: 273-278
2021
- 53Captures
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.
Metrics Details
- Captures53
- Readers53
- 53
Review Description
Purpose of reviewTo review the role of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines in promoting the quality and consistency of supportive care in oncology to meet the needs of practitioners and patients.Recent findingsTo maintain quality, guidelines must be regularly updated in terms of content as new treatment modalities like immunotherapy are introduced, adapted to new methodologies such as the application of artificial intelligence, adoption of multiple symptoms or orphan symptoms and capture new endpoints such a patient-reported outcomes. This helps prevent a major barrier to implementation; negative attitudes of practitioners towards guidelines. Digital guidelines provide greater opportunities for dissemination, ease of updating and can be linked to education modules. The quality must be assured by critically appraising the literature and then grading the level of evidence of the guidelines. The benefits of supportive care guidelines include guidance for clinical decision-making in a changing field, continuing professional development of practitioners, a source of information for patients and in highlighting the gaps where further research is necessary.SummaryThe implications are that guidelines are required for supportive care in cancer but they must be constantly updated and evolve in their structure, the rigour of appraisal and content to promote quality care.
Bibliographic Details
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know