You are here

Responses

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Health services research
Protocol
Developing an Australian multi-module clinical quality registry for gynaecological cancers: a protocol paper
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 4 March 2020
    Clinical quality registry for gynecological cancers: attention to staging
    • Juliana P Guimaraes, Researcher & physician Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Goiás - Goiânia, GO, Brasil.
    • Other Contributors:
      • Leonardo R Soares, Researcher & physician

    Dear editor,

    We carefully read the study protocol proposed by Heriot et al (1), regarding the development of a prospective registry of gynecological cancers in Australia. In fact, it is a heterogeneous group of pathologies, with different clinical presentations, diagnostic characteristics and therapeutic proposals (2,3). Together, this oncological complexity can restrict the daily practice of the professionals involved in this context and even impair the treatment of the women affected.

    Oncological staging consists of a process to estimate the extent of the cancer present in the body of an affected person. Despite the particularities of each tumor site, it usually involves an evaluation obtained by physical examination associated with specific complementary examinations. However, in a real-world scenario, several factors can add limitations to this staging process (4).

    Considering the staging of gynecological cancers, the interobserver variation in tumor measurement and clinical evaluation of patients stands out. In this context, if the tumor palpation varies by a few centimeters, the patient's clinical staging and prognostic classification are also altered. In addition, the disease itself can evolve throughout the diagnostic process, which can involve several months depending on the geographic region and specific socioeconomic conditions. Thus, professionals with less experience can make mistakes in defining the clinical stage and, consequently,...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.