A Research Agenda for Radiation Oncology: Results of the Radiation Oncology Institute's Comprehensive Research Needs Assessment

被引:18
作者
Jagsi, Reshma [1 ]
Bekelman, Justin E. [2 ]
Brawley, Otis W. [3 ,4 ]
Deasy, Joseph O. [5 ]
Le, Quynh-Thu [6 ]
Michalski, Jeff M. [7 ]
Movsas, Benjamin [8 ]
Thomas, Charles R. [9 ]
Lawton, Colleen A. [10 ]
Lawrence, Theodore S. [1 ]
Hahn, Stephen M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Emory Univ, Dept Hematol & Oncol, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[4] Amer Canc Soc, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA
[5] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, New York, NY 10021 USA
[6] Stanford Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[7] Washington Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, St Louis, MO USA
[8] Henry Ford Hlth Syst, Dept Radiat Oncol, Detroit, MI USA
[9] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Portland, OR 97201 USA
[10] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2012年 / 84卷 / 02期
关键词
Radiation oncology; Research; Needs; Priorities; Delphi; PERSPECTIVES; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.11.076
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 [肿瘤学];
摘要
Purpose: To promote the rational use of scarce research funding, scholars have developed methods for the systematic identification and prioritization of health research needs. The Radiation Oncology Institute commissioned an independent, comprehensive assessment of research needs for the advancement of radiation oncology care. Methods and Materials: The research needs assessment used a mixed-method, qualitative and quantitative social scientific approach, including structured interviews with diverse stakeholders, focus groups, surveys of American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) members, and a prioritization exercise using a modified Delphi technique. Results: Six co-equal priorities were identified: (1) Identify and develop communication strategies to help patients and others better understand radiation therapy; (2) Establish a set of quality indicators for major radiation oncology procedures and evaluate their use in radiation oncology delivery; (3) Identify best practices for the management of radiation toxicity and issues in cancer survivorship; (4) Conduct comparative effectiveness studies related to radiation therapy that consider clinical benefit, toxicity (including quality of life), and other outcomes; (5) Assess the value of radiation therapy; and (6) Develop a radiation oncology registry. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this prioritization exercise is the only comprehensive and methodologically rigorous assessment of research needs in the field of radiation oncology. Broad dissemination of these findings is critical to maximally leverage the impact of this work, particularly because grant funding decisions are often made by committees on which highly specialized disciplines such as radiation oncology are not well represented. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:318 / 322
页数:5
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2017, NATION
[2]
[Anonymous], IN PRIOR COMP EFF RE
[3]
Implications of comparative effectiveness research for radiation oncology [J].
Bekelman, Justin E. ;
Shah, Anand ;
Hahn, Stephen M. .
PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2011, 1 (02) :72-80
[4]
Statistical process control for IMRT dosimetric verification [J].
Breen, Stephen L. ;
Moseley, Douglas J. ;
Zhang, Beibei ;
Sharpe, Michael B. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2008, 35 (10) :4417-4425
[5]
Gliklich RE, 2007, REGISTRIES EVALUATIN
[6]
Laypersons' Responses to the Communication of Uncertainty Regarding Cancer Risk Estimates [J].
Han, Paul K. J. ;
Klein, William M. P. ;
Lehman, Thomas C. ;
Massett, Holly ;
Lee, Simon C. ;
Freedman, Andrew N. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2009, 29 (03) :391-403
[7]
Hendee W, 2011, MED PHYS, V38, pi
[8]
Medical Physics Letter Improving patient safety in radiation oncology [J].
Hendee, William R. ;
Herman, Michael G. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (01) :78-82
[9]
Institute of Medicine, 2005, PAT CANC SURV LOST T
[10]
Institute of Medicine, 2003, PRIOR AR NAT ACT