↓ Skip to main content

Value-Based Breast Cancer Care: A Multidisciplinary Approach for Defining Patient-Centered Outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
Value-Based Breast Cancer Care: A Multidisciplinary Approach for Defining Patient-Centered Outcomes
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, March 2016
DOI 10.1245/s10434-016-5184-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oluwadamilola M. Fayanju, Tinisha L. Mayo, Tracy E. Spinks, Seohyun Lee, Carlos H. Barcenas, Benjamin D. Smith, Sharon H. Giordano, Rosa F. Hwang, Richard A. Ehlers, Jesse C. Selber, Ronald Walters, Debu Tripathy, Kelly K. Hunt, Thomas A. Buchholz, Thomas W. Feeley, Henry M. Kuerer

Abstract

Value in healthcare-i.e., patient-centered outcomes achieved per healthcare dollar spent-can define quality and unify performance improvement goals with health outcomes of importance to patients across the entire cycle of care. We describe the process through which value-based measures for breast cancer patients and dynamic capture of these metrics via our new electronic health record (EHR) were developed at our institution. Contemporary breast cancer literature on treatment options, expected outcomes, and potential complications was extensively reviewed. Patient perspective was obtained via focus groups. Multidisciplinary physician teams met to inform a 3-phase process of (1) concept development, (2) measure specification, and (3) implementation via EHR integration. Outcomes were divided into 3 tiers that reflect the entire cycle of care: (1) health status achieved, (2) process of recovery, and (3) sustainability of health. Within these tiers, 22 patient-centered outcomes were defined with inclusion/exclusion criteria and specifications for reporting. Patient data sources will include the Epic Systems EHR and validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires administered via our institution's patient portal. As healthcare costs continue to rise in the United States and around the world, a value-based approach with explicit, transparently reported patient outcomes will not only create opportunities for performance improvement but will also enable benchmarking across providers, healthcare systems, and even countries. Similar value-based breast cancer care frameworks are also being pursued internationally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 21%
Student > Master 17 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Other 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 25 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Psychology 5 5%
Engineering 5 5%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 31 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,528,495
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#1,430
of 6,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,107
of 299,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#14
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,479 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 299,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.