Editorial S1 Context and cooperation S3 Responsibility S4 Composition of the Guideline Group S4 Autonomy S4 Aims and method S4 Multimedication guideline S5 Summary S6 Prescription process S6 General measures for reducing undesirable multimedication S7 Multimedication guideline S8 Aims and target groups of the guidelines S8 Explanation S8 Key questions for general practitioners This journal is included in the abstracting and indexing coverage of the Bio-Sciences Information Service of Biological Abstracts, and is listed in Current Contents (Life Sciences), MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Elsevier BIOBASE/Current Awareness in Biological Sciences, SCOPUS. All articles published in the International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics must be contributed to it exclusively. The following types of papers are acceptable: original papers, outline summaries of special problems, letters to the editor, short news items on new developments and other topics of current interest. All experimental data should be obtained from humans. Animal and in vitro investigations can be published only occasionally and only on condition that they have a close relationship to human pharmacological investigations. The editor responsible reserves the right of selection from submitted manuscripts (after consulting at least two reviewers) and the right to make stylistic changes or abridgements. The manuscripts may not be submitted elsewhere for printing or publication; following acceptance the publisher acquires all copyrights.

Our survey points to the importance of the GP during cancer therapy from the patient's point of view. Patients want their GP to take an active part in the cancer therapy. Furthermore, early integration of the GP may also enhance early integration of palliative care and also help family members and caregivers. A strategy to integrate GPs is the establishment of shared care models, in which GPs are supported by specialists and get additional training in cancer care.

No abstract

No abstract

Oncology is a rapidly developing field with a growing number of publications every year. The main goal of this survey was to learn more about the information needs of oncologists and general practitioners. Data were collected using a standardised questionnaire developed in collaboration with the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) and the German Association of General Practitioners (Deutscher Hausärzteverband). A total of 495 questionnaires could be evaluated. Medical congresses were the preferred source of information for all participants. General practitioners preferred textbooks, while oncologists preferred journals and the Internet (all p < .001). Reasons for a lack of confidence during patient consultation were lack of time (60% of participants), lack of knowledge (61% of general practitioners and 26% of oncologists) and lack of data (>50%). Oncologists felt more confident in searching scientific databases than general practitioners did. Both groups required rapid access to transparent information. For general practitioners, reviews and comments by experts helped to put new information in the context of cancer treatment. Oncologists and general practitioners showed significantly different information needs and different ways to access specific information. In order to better integrate general practitioners while simultaneously serving the needs of oncologists, a database that is up to date, rapidly accessible and does not incur high costs would be helpful.