Hematology oncology practice in the Asia-Pacific APHCON survey results from the 6th international hematologic malignancies conference: bridging the gap 2015, Beijing, China
AuthorHuang, XJ; Liu, K; Ritchie, D; Andersson, B; Lu, J; Hou, J; Burguera, ADLF; Wang, J; Yeoh, A; Yan, C; ...
PublisherIMPACT JOURNALS LLC
University of Melbourne Author/sRitchie, David
Document TypeJournal Article
CitationsHuang, X. J., Liu, K., Ritchie, D., Andersson, B., Lu, J., Hou, J., Burguera, A. D. L. F., Wang, J., Yeoh, A., Yan, C., Zhou, D., Tan, D., Kim, D. W., Wu, D., Shpall, E., Kornblau, S., Neelapu, S., Hongeng, S., Li, J. ,... Issaragrisil, S. (2017). Hematology oncology practice in the Asia-Pacific APHCON survey results from the 6th international hematologic malignancies conference: bridging the gap 2015, Beijing, China. ONCOTARGET, 8 (25), pp.41620-41630. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.15655.
Access StatusOpen Access
This report serves as a snapshot of the state-of-knowledge in the Asia Pacific (APAC) Hematology Oncology community, and establishes a baseline for longitudinal investigations to follow changes in best practices over time. The objective of this study was to understand the approach to hematologic diseases, common standards of care and best practices, issues that remain controversial or debated, and educational or resource gaps that warrant attention. We used mobile application to disseminate and distribute questionnaires to delegates during the 6th international hematologic malignancies conference hosted by the APAC Hematology Consortium at Beijing, China. User responses were collected in an anonymous fashion. We report survey results in two ways: the overall responses, and responses as stratified between Chinese physicians and "Other" represented nationalities. Overall geographical concordance in survey responses was positive and strong. Perhaps more interesting than instances of absolute agreement, these data provide a unique opportunity to identify topics in which physician knowledge or opinions diverge. We assigned questions from all modules to broad categories of: patient information; diagnosis; treatment preference; transplantation; and general knowledge/opinion. On average, we observed a geographic difference of 15% for any particular answer choice, and this was fairly constant across survey modules. These results reveal utility and need for widespread and ongoing initiatives to assess knowledge and provide evidence-based education in real time. The data will be made more valuable by longitudinal participation, such that we can monitor changes in the state of the art over time.
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References