Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23019277›Full record

ArticleAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2013

Patient-doctor agreement on recall of clinical trial discussion across cultures.

J Bernhard, J Aldridge, P N Butow, P Zoller, R Brown, A Smith, I Juraskova

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

J BernhardIBCSG Coordinating Center, Bern; Department of Medical Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. Electronic address: juerg.bernhard@ibcsg.org.
J AldridgeIBCSG Statistical Center, Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA.
P N ButowSchool of Psychology, Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED); Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
P ZollerIBCSG Coordinating Center, Bern.
R BrownDepartment of Social and Behavioral Health, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA.
A SmithPsycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
I JuraskovaSchool of Psychology, Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED).
The University of Sydney · AUBoston University · USInternational Breast Cancer Study Group · CHUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

IBCSG STATISTICAL CENTER--A BREAST CANCER STUDY RESOURCEU24CA075362 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI REGAN, MEREDITH M · 1997 to 2015
$7.5M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA075362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose was to investigate patient-doctor agreement on clinical trial discussion cross-culturally.

methodsIn the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 33-03 on shared decision-making for early breast cancer in Australian/New Zealand (ANZ) and Swiss/German/Austrian (SGA) centers, doctor and patient characteristics plus doctor stress and burnout were assessed. Within 2 weeks post-consultation about treatment options, the doctor and patient reported independently, whether a trial was discussed. Odds ratios of agreement for covariables were estimated by generalized estimating equations for each language cohort, with doctor as a random effect.

resultsIn ANZ, 21 doctors and 339 patients were eligible; in SGA, 41 doctors and 427 patients. In cases where the doctor indicated 'no trial discussed', 82% of both ANZ and SGA patients agreed; if the doctor indicated 'trial discussed', 50% of ANZ and 38% of SGA patients agreed, respectively. Factors associated with higher agreement were: low tumor grade and fewer patients recruited into clinical trials in SGA; public institution, patient born in ANZ (versus other), higher doctor depersonalization and personal accomplishment in ANZ.

conclusionThere is discordance between oncologists and their patients regarding clinical trial discussion, particularly when the doctor indicates that a trial was discussed. Factors contributing to this agreement vary by culture.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicDecision MakingPhysician-Patient RelationsBreast NeoplasmsCommunicationComprehensionFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMental RecallStress, Psychological

Identifiers

PMID23019277
PMCPMC3551480
OpenAlexW2097979599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.