Person:
Schapira, Lidia

Profile Picture

Email Address

AA Acceptance Date

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

Schapira

First Name

Lidia

Name

Schapira, Lidia
Author's Publications: search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.d1a64cc7-73a2-4679-a61d-b4963b64f014

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    The Influence of the Patient-Clinician Relationship on Healthcare Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    (Public Library of Science, 2014) Kelley, John; Kraft-Todd, Gordon; Schapira, Lidia; Kossowsky, Joe; Riess, Helen
    Objective: To determine whether the patient-clinician relationship has a beneficial effect on either objective or validated subjective healthcare outcomes. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data Sources Electronic databases EMBASE and MEDLINE and the reference sections of previous reviews. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients in which the patient-clinician relationship was systematically manipulated and healthcare outcomes were either objective (e.g., blood pressure) or validated subjective measures (e.g., pain scores). Studies were excluded if the encounter was a routine physical, or a mental health or substance abuse visit; if the outcome was an intermediate outcome such as patient satisfaction or adherence to treatment; if the patient-clinician relationship was manipulated solely by intervening with patients; or if the duration of the clinical encounter was unequal across conditions. Results: Thirteen RCTs met eligibility criteria. Observed effect sizes for the individual studies ranged from d = −.23 to .66. Using a random-effects model, the estimate of the overall effect size was small (d = .11), but statistically significant (p = .02). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that the patient-clinician relationship has a small, but statistically significant effect on healthcare outcomes. Given that relatively few RCTs met our eligibility criteria, and that the majority of these trials were not specifically designed to test the effect of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes, we conclude with a call for more research on this important topic.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    ESMO / ASCO Recommendations for a Global Curriculum in Medical Oncology Edition 2016
    (BMJ Publishing Group, 2016) Dittrich, Christian; Kosty, Michael; Jezdic, Svetlana; Pyle, Doug; Berardi, Rossana; Bergh, Jonas; El-Saghir, Nagi; Lotz, Jean-Pierre; Österlund, Pia; Pavlidis, Nicholas; Purkalne, Gunta; Awada, Ahmad; Banerjee, Susana; Bhatia, Smita; Bogaerts, Jan; Buckner, Jan; Cardoso, Fatima; Casali, Paolo; Chu, Edward; Close, Julia Lee; Coiffier, Bertrand; Connolly, Roisin; Coupland, Sarah; De Petris, Luigi; De Santis, Maria; de Vries, Elisabeth G E; Dizon, Don S; Duff, Jennifer; Duska, Linda R; Eniu, Alexandru; Ernstoff, Marc; Felip, Enriqueta; Fey, Martin F; Gilbert, Jill; Girard, Nicolas; Glaudemans, Andor W J M; Gopalan, Priya K; Grothey, Axel; Hahn, Stephen M; Hanna, Diana; Herold, Christian; Herrstedt, Jørn; Homicsko, Krisztian; Jones, Dennie V; Jost, Lorenz; Keilholz, Ulrich; Khan, Saad; Kiss, Alexander; Köhne, Claus-Henning; Kunstfeld, Rainer; Lenz, Heinz-Josef; Lichtman, Stuart; Licitra, Lisa; Lion, Thomas; Litière, Saskia; Liu, Lifang; Loehrer, Patrick J; Markham, Merry Jennifer; Markman, Ben; Mayerhoefer, Marius; Meran, Johannes G; Michielin, Olivier; Moser, Elizabeth Charlotte; Mountzios, Giannis; Moynihan, Timothy; Nielsen, Torsten; Ohe, Yuichiro; Öberg, Kjell; Palumbo, Antonio; Peccatori, Fedro Alessandro; Pfeilstöcker, Michael; Raut, Chandrajit; Remick, Scot C; Robson, Mark; Rutkowski, Piotr; Salgado, Roberto; Schapira, Lidia; Schernhammer, Eva; Schlumberger, Martin; Schmoll, Hans-Joachim; Schnipper, Lowell; Sessa, Cristiana; Shapiro, Charles L; Steele, Julie; Sternberg, Cora N; Stiefel, Friedrich; Strasser, Florian; Stupp, Roger; Sullivan, Richard; Tabernero, Josep; Travado, Luzia; Verheij, Marcel; Voest, Emile; Vokes, Everett; Von Roenn, Jamie; Weber, Jeffrey S; Wildiers, Hans; Yarden, Yosef
    The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are publishing a new edition of the ESMO/ASCO Global Curriculum (GC) thanks to contribution of 64 ESMO-appointed and 32 ASCO-appointed authors. First published in 2004 and updated in 2010, the GC edition 2016 answers to the need for updated recommendations for the training of physicians in medical oncology by defining the standard to be fulfilled to qualify as medical oncologists. At times of internationalisation of healthcare and increased mobility of patients and physicians, the GC aims to provide state-of-the-art cancer care to all patients wherever they live. Recent progress in the field of cancer research has indeed resulted in diagnostic and therapeutic innovations such as targeted therapies as a standard therapeutic approach or personalised cancer medicine apart from the revival of immunotherapy, requiring specialised training for medical oncology trainees. Thus, several new chapters on technical contents such as molecular pathology, translational research or molecular imaging and on conceptual attitudes towards human principles like genetic counselling or survivorship have been integrated in the GC. The GC edition 2016 consists of 12 sections with 17 subsections, 44 chapters and 35 subchapters, respectively. Besides renewal in its contents, the GC underwent a principal formal change taking into consideration modern didactic principles. It is presented in a template-based format that subcategorises the detailed outcome requirements into learning objectives, awareness, knowledge and skills. Consecutive steps will be those of harmonising and implementing teaching and assessment strategies.