2015
DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

NCCN Roundtable:Value-Based Decision-Making at the Bedside

Abstract: As part of the NCCN 20th Annual Conference: Advancing the Standard of Cancer Care, a distinguished and diverse group of experts on value-based decision-making in oncology discussed guidelines and pathways and how their use has impacted bedside evidence-based decision-making for both physicians and patients. Moderated by Clifford Goodman, PhD, the roundtable also reflected on the criteria used to assess shared decision-making and the relationship between outcomes and cost when determining value.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, some have named engaging the patient as the most important attribute of patient‐centered care, particularly regarding important decisions such as major surgery 24 . In addition to honoring the value of patient autonomy, patient‐centered care also has the potential to increase patient satisfaction, improve outcomes, and reduce costs 2,25 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, some have named engaging the patient as the most important attribute of patient‐centered care, particularly regarding important decisions such as major surgery 24 . In addition to honoring the value of patient autonomy, patient‐centered care also has the potential to increase patient satisfaction, improve outcomes, and reduce costs 2,25 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network expanded their definition of value to include efficacy, safety, quality, and affordability. 4,5 Work continues on the development of algorithms to guide how payers and practitioners associate costs with benefits of oral agents. 6,7 In this editorial, we argue that, for oral molecular agents, the NHB should be viewed distinctly for each patient as the treatment progresses.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%