Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Journal Citations

Related Journal Citations

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:

  • Reviewers asked for a more thorough description of the process of care in the multidisciplinary care and the serial care models, and more explanation of how patients entered the models. The researchers provided additional details on how referral patterns and provider choice determined which model of care patients received and what types of care patients received under each model.
  • Reviewers commented that the different stages of lung cancer are likely to need different types of care. For instance, stage IV patients were less likely to need surgery or radiation, and many more stage IV patients entered the serial care arm than the multidisciplinary care arm. The researchers agreed that it would be important to use disease stage as subgroups in future analyses of survival but that the data are not yet fully available to complete such analyses.
  • The reviewers noted that the researchers overstated the success of multidisciplinary care in improving the quality and outcomes of lung cancer care. In response, the researchers clarified that multidisciplinary care was measurably linked to patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes but not to clinical outcomes, like survival rates.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Project Information

Raymond U. Osarogiagbon, MD
Baptist Memorial Hospital-Tipton
$2,125,258
10.25302/02.2020.IH.13046147
Building a Multidisciplinary Bridge Across the Quality Chasm in Thoracic Oncology

Key Dates

September 2013
August 2018
2013
2018

Study Registration Information

Tags

Has Results
Award Type
Health Conditions Health Conditions These are the broad terms we use to categorize our funded research studies; specific diseases or conditions are included within the appropriate larger category. Note: not all of our funded projects focus on a single disease or condition; some touch on multiple diseases or conditions, research methods, or broader health system interventions. Such projects won’t be listed by a primary disease/condition and so won’t appear if you use this filter tool to find them. View Glossary
Populations Populations PCORI is interested in research that seeks to better understand how different clinical and health system options work for different people. These populations are frequently studied in our portfolio or identified as being of interest by our stakeholders. View Glossary
Funding Opportunity Type
Intervention Strategy Intervention Strategies PCORI funds comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) studies that compare two or more options or approaches to health care, or that compare different ways of delivering or receiving care. View Glossary
Research Priority Area
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: April 20, 2022