Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22201670›Full record

ReviewOncology nursing forum2012

Physician, patient, and contextual factors affecting treatment decisions in older adults with cancer and models of decision making: a literature review.

Joseph D Tariman, Donna L Berry, Barbara Cochrane, Ardith Doorenbos, Karen G Schepp

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oncology nursing forum, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Patient perceptions of altering chemotherapy treatment due to peripheral neuropathy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph D TarimanMyeloma Program, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. phdinseattle@yahoo.com
Donna L Berry
Barbara Cochrane
Ardith Doorenbos
Karen G Schepp
University of Washington · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

Treatment decision making in older adults newly diagnosed with multiple myelomaF31NR011124 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI TARIMAN, JOSEPH D · 2009 to 2010
$50k
NINR NIH HHS F31 NR011124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PURPOSE/

objectivesTo review physician, patient, and contextual factors that affect treatment decision making in older adults diagnosed with cancer, and to relate those factors to theoretical models of decision making. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1966 to April 2010), PsycINFO (1967 to April 2010) and CINAHL® (1982 to April 2010) databases were searched to access relevant medical, psychological, and nursing literature. DATA SYNTHESIS: Physician factors in treatment decisions included physician's personal beliefs and values, medical expertise, practice type, perception of lowered life expectancy, medical factors, power, and communication style. Patient factors included personal beliefs and values, ethnicity, decisional control preferences, previous health-related experience, perception of the decision-making process, and personal factors. Contextual factors included availability of caregiver, insurance, financial status, and geographical barrier.

conclusionsA diverse group of factors were identified, which are likely to form a unique framework to understand clinical decision making and plan future investigations in older adult patient populations. Using longitudinal and prospective designs to examine the real-time interplay of patient, physician, and contextual factors will enable a better understanding of how those divergent factors influence actual treatment decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Oncology nurses can advocate autonomous (patient-driven), shared, or family-controlled treatment decisions, depending on an older patient's decisional role preference. Nurses can support patient autonomy during treatment decision making by coaching patients to engage in discussion of various evidence-based treatment options and a comprehensive discussion of the probability of success for each option with specialist providers. Oncology nurses may be able to promote treatment decisions that are consistent with a patient's personal preferences and values, with strong consideration of the patient's personal contexts.

Indexed as

Medical OncologyOncology NursingAgedAgingHumansNeoplasmsPatientsPhysicians

Identifiers

PMID22201670
PMCPMC3247918
OpenAlexW2131935984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.