2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Examining interprofessional collaboration in oncogenetic service delivery models for hereditary cancers: a scoping review protocol

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          In a context of limited genetic specialists, collaborative models have been proposed to ensure timely access to high quality oncogenetic services for individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility. Yet, extensive variability in the terminology used and lack of a clear understanding of how interprofessional collaboration is operationalised and evaluated currently constrains the development of a robust evidence base on the value of different approaches used to optimise access to these services. To fill in this knowledge gap, this scoping review aims to systematically unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed by these interventions, and synthesise the evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact.

          Methods and analysis

          Following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, a comprehensive literature search will be conducted to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature on collaborative models used for adult patients with, or at increased risk of, hereditary breast, ovarian, colorectal and prostate cancers. An initial search was developed for Medline, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Cochrane and Web of Science on 13 June 2022 and will be complemented by searches in Google and relevant websites. Documents describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of these interventions will be considered for inclusion. Results will be summarised descriptively and used to compare relevant model characteristics and synthesise evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. This process is expected to guide the development of a definition and typology of collaborative models in oncogenetics that could help strengthen the knowledge base on these interventions. Moreover, because we will be mapping the existing evidence on collaborative models in oncogenetics, the proposed review will help us identify areas where additional research might be needed.

          Ethics and dissemination

          This research does not require ethics approval. Results from this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles and conferences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

            The objective of this paper is to describe the updated methodological guidance for conducting a JBI scoping review, with a focus on new updates to the approach and development of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (the PRISMA-ScR).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019 : A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

              Question What was the burden of cancer globally and across Sociodemographic Index (SDI) groupings in 2019, and how has incidence, morbidity, and mortality changed since 2010? Findings In this systematic analysis, there were 23.6 million new global cancer cases in 2019 (17.2 million when excluding those with nonmelanoma skin cancer), 10.0 million cancer deaths, and an estimated 250 million disability-adjusted life years estimated to be due to cancer; since 2010, these represent increases of 26.3%, 20.9%, and 16.0%, respectively. Absolute cancer burden increased in all SDI quintiles since 2010, but the largest percentage increases occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. Meanings The study results suggest that increased cancer prevention and control efforts are needed to equitably address the evolving and increasing burden of cancer across the SDI spectrum. Importance The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. Objective To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. Evidence Review The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). Findings In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 examines cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Socio-demographic Index quintiles from 2010 to 2019.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2022
                13 December 2022
                : 12
                : 12
                : e066802
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentPopulation Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit , Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [2 ]departmentDépartement des opérations et systèmes de décision, Faculté des sciences de l'administration , Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [3 ]departmentDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine , Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [4 ]departmentOncology Division , Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [5 ]departmentFaculty of Pharmacy , Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [6 ]departmentCISSS , Chaudière-Appalaches Research Center , Lévis, Québec, Canada
                [7 ]departmentDépartement de cancérologie , CHU de Québec-Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [8 ]departmentVitam, Centre de recherche en santé durable , Laval University , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Maude Laberge; maude.laberge@ 123456fsa.ulaval.ca
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6113-3048
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1718-5307
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3207-8211
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7832-0413
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1274-136X
                Article
                bmjopen-2022-066802
                10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066802
                9748975
                36523215
                34d83e25-7635-477b-9bdb-d3f5f2ea2805
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 20 July 2022
                : 10 November 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: This scoping review is part of the C-MOnGene study, funded by Oncopole, which receives financing from Merck Canada Inc., Quebec Research Fund—Health (FRQ-S), and GSK (Grant # 296057). HN, ML and JRG have all been awarded research career awards from the Quebec Research Fund in Health (FRQ-S). The funding agencies had no role in the selection of the topic, design and/or writing of this protocol manuscript.;
                Award ID: 296057
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                1506
                1704
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                cancer genetics,adult oncology,organisation of health services
                Medicine
                cancer genetics, adult oncology, organisation of health services

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content116

                Most referenced authors2,789