Evaluation of Interactions and Group Processes in Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Gynecologic Oncology

NCT07645716 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: 27221-1
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 400
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Study Title Group Dynamics Evaluation in Gynecologic Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards - GOLD Study Background and Rationale Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards are central to complex oncologic decision-making. In gynecologic oncology, clinical decisions often require the integration of knowledge from different specialties, including surgery, medical oncology, radiology, pathology, radiation oncology, and other relevant disciplines. These teams function not only as groups of specialists but also as collective decision-making systems, where communication, collaboration, information sharing, psychological safety, and group dynamics may influence the quality of clinical discussion and final recommendations. Study Objective The GOLD Study aims to investigate the decision-making process and group dynamics within ovarian and uterine cancer Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards. The study will assess how communication patterns, collaboration, minority dissent, team cohesion, team learning, task interdependence, collective information processing, individual information processing, and psychological safety contribute to Tumor Board performance. Study Design This is a single-center, prospective, longitudinal observational study involving physicians participating in ovarian and uterine cancer Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards, either in person or online. Methods At the end of each Tumor Board meeting, participating physicians will complete an online survey using Microsoft Forms. The questionnaire was developed within a scientific collaboration with the Department of Business and Management of LUISS Guido Carli University and includes validated measurement scales derived from the literature. In addition, data on team composition and participation will be collected for each meeting. Statistical Analysis Survey data and participation data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, inferential methods, and social network analysis. Network measures such as density and centralization indices will be used to evaluate the structure of interactions and participation over time. Statistical analyses will be performed using Stata, R, and UCINET where appropriate. Target Population and Sample Size The target population includes physicians involved in the clinical decision-making process during ovarian and uterine cancer Tumor Boards. A total of approximately 400 questionnaires is planned, based on the rule of thumb of at least 10 respondents per questionnaire variable. Study Duration The expected study duration is six months.

Conditions

Ovarian Neoplasms; Uterine Neoplasms

Keywords

Ovarian Neoplasms; Uterine Neoplasms; Multidisciplinary Tumor Board; Clinical Decision Making; Group Dynamics; Team Communication; Social Network Analysis; Surveys and Questionnaires

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Decision-Making and Group Dynamics in Gynecologic Tumor Boards

  Assessment of the decision-making process and group dynamics within ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board meetings. The outcome will be measured using an online survey completed by participating physicians at the end of each meeting. The survey evaluates team cohesion, minority dissent, team learning, task interdependence, collective information processing, team communication, individual information processing, and team psychological safety.

  6-month study period

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Tumor Board Interaction Patterns by Social Network Analysis

  Over 6 months

Study Arms (1)

Group/Cohort Label: Gynecologic Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Physicians

Physicians involved in clinical decision-making during ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board meetings. Participants complete an online survey after each meeting; no intervention is administered.

Other: Online Survey Assessment of Tumor Board Group Dynamics

Interventions

Online Survey Assessment of Tumor Board Group Dynamics OTHER

Participants will complete an online survey after each ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board meeting. The survey assesses group dynamics and decision-making processes, including team cohesion, minority dissent, team learning, task interdependence, collective information processing, team communication, individual information processing, and psychological safety. No clinical, pharmacological, diagnostic, surgical, radiation, behavioral, or therapeutic intervention will be administered.

Also known as: Questionnaire-Based Assessment

Group/Cohort Label: Gynecologic Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Physicians

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Physicians participating in ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board meetings at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, either in person or online, who are involved in the clinical decision-making process during the study period.

You may qualify if:

• Physicians participating in the clinical decision-making process within ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board meetings.
• Participation in the full tumor board session.
• Participation either in person or online.
• Representation of at least one relevant specialty or role involved in the clinical decision-making process.

You may not qualify if:

• Partial attendance at the ovarian and uterine cancer multidisciplinary tumor board session.
• Trainees or other attendees not directly involved in the clinical decision-making process.
• Physicians whose specialty contribution consists of occasional consultation for less than 50% of the study period.
• Incomplete survey completion.
• If more than one member represents the same specialty or role, participants with lower participation in the clinical decision-making process may be excluded.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS: lead

Study Sites (1)

Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica

Roma, Roma, 00168, Italy

Location

Related Publications (12)

• Mayo, A. T., Woolley, A. W., John, L., March, C., Witchel, S., & Nowalk, A. (2025). Coordination in dynamic teams: Investigating a learning-productivity trade-off. Organization Science, 36(2), 967-992.

  BACKGROUND

• Markulis, P., Jassawalla, A. R., & Sashittal, H. (2006). The impact of leadership modes on team dynamics and performance in undergraduate management classes. Journal of Education for Business, 81(3), 145-150.

  BACKGROUND

• Liberati EG, Gorli M, Scaratti G. Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: Disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care. Soc Sci Med. 2016 Feb;150:31-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.002. Epub 2015 Dec 9.

  PMID: 26730879 BACKGROUND

• Kearney E, Gebert D. Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the promise of transformational leadership. J Appl Psychol. 2009 Jan;94(1):77-89. doi: 10.1037/a0013077.

  PMID: 19186897 BACKGROUND

• Hoegl M, Gemuenden HG (2001) Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organ. Sci. 12(4):435-449.

  BACKGROUND

• Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior. (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hill

  BACKGROUND

• Edmondson, A. C., & Harvey, J. F. (2025). Team Learning in the Field: An Organizing Framework and Avenues for Future Research. Small Group Research, 10464964251316877.

  BACKGROUND

• Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.

  BACKGROUND

• De Dreu CK, West MA. Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making. J Appl Psychol. 2001 Dec;86(6):1191-201. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191.

  PMID: 11768061 BACKGROUND

• Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of management Journal, 50(5), 1217-1234.

  BACKGROUND

• Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel psychology, 46(4), 823-847.

  BACKGROUND

• Carless, S. A., & De Paola, C. (2000). The measurement of cohesion in work teams. Small group research, 31(1), 71-88.

  BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Ovarian Neoplasms; Uterine Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Endocrine Gland Neoplasms; Neoplasms by Site; Neoplasms; Ovarian Diseases; Adnexal Diseases; Genital Diseases, Female; Female Urogenital Diseases; Female Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy Complications; Urogenital Diseases; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Urogenital Neoplasms; Genital Diseases; Endocrine System Diseases; Gonadal Disorders; Uterine Diseases

Study Officials

• Anna Fagotti

  Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Carmine Conte, Dr.

CONTACT

+393290275147; armine.conte@policlinicogemelli.it

Andrea Rosati, Dr.

CONTACT

+393385054943; andrea.rosati@policlinicogemelli.it

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: OTHER
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Prof.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: June 9, 2026
• First Posted: June 12, 2026
• Study Start (Estimated): July 13, 2026
• Primary Completion (Estimated): January 31, 2027
• Study Completion (Estimated): March 31, 2027
• Last Updated: June 12, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-06

Locations

IT (1)