↓ Skip to main content

Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2286-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Quentin Denost, Florence Saillour, Lindy Masya, Helene Maillou Martinaud, Stephanie Guillon, Marion Kret, Eric Rullier, Bruno Quintard, Michael Solomon

Abstract

Among patients with rectal cancer, 5-10 % have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10 % recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients 'care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regarding overall management and criteria for operative intervention. These variations in practice can be explained by structural and organizational differences, as well as cultural dissimilarities. However, surgical resection of PRC-bTME and LRRC provides the best chance of long-term survival after complete resection (R0). With regards to the organization of the healthcare system and the operative criteria for these patients, France and Australia seem to be highly different. A benchmarking-type analysis between French and Australian clinical practice, with regards to the care and management of PRC-bTME and LRRC, would allow understanding of patients' care and management structures as well as individual and collective mechanisms of operative decision-making in order to ensure equitable practice and improve survival for these patients. The current study is an international Benchmarking trial comparing two cohorts of 120 consecutive patients with non-metastatic PRC-bTME and LRRC. Patients with curative and palliative treatment intent are included. The study design has three main parts: (1) French and Australian cohorts including clinical, radiological and surgical data, quality of life (MOS SF36, FACT-C) and distress level (Distress thermometer) at the inclusion, 6 and 12 months; (2) experimental analyses consisting of a blinded inter-country reading of pelvic MRI to assess operatory decisions; (3) qualitative analyses based on MDT meeting observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups of health professional attendees and conducted by a research psychologist in both countries using the same guides. The primary endpoint will be the clinical resection rate. Secondary end points will be concordance rate between French and Australian operative decisions based on the inter-country reading MRI, post-operative mortality and morbidity rates, oncological outcomes based on resection status and one-year overall and disease-free survival, patients' quality of life and distress level. Qualitative analysis will compare obstacles and facilitators of operative decision-making between both countries. Benchmarking can be defined as a comparison and learning process which will allow, in the context of PRC-bTME and LRRC, to understand and to share the whole process management of these patientsbetween Farnce and Australia. NCT02551471 . (date of registration: 09/14/2015).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 11 14%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 36%
Psychology 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 24 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,054,237
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,567
of 8,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,055
of 301,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#96
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,487 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.