Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23892559›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2013

Why do some patients prefer to leave decisions up to the doctor: lack of self-efficacy or a matter of trust?

Neetu Chawla, Neeraj K Arora

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Self-efficacy of advanced cancer patients for participation in treatment-related decision-making in six European countries: the ACTION study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Neetu ChawlaOutcomes Research Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 3E450, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA, neetu.chawla@nih.gov.
Neeraj K Arora
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Research ProjectU54CA153499 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI CHEN, MOON SHAO-CHUANG, CHOW, EDWARD A. · 2010 to 2015
$6.7M
NCI NIH HHS N01-PC-35136NCI NIH HHS U54 CA153499
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDecision-making preferences among cancer survivors during their follow-up care remains understudied and limited research examines factors that underlie these preferences. The purpose of this study was to assess cancer patients' decision-making preferences during follow-up care, the role of trust and self-efficacy, and the effect of preferences on health outcomes.

methodsSix hundred twenty-three bladder, leukemia, and colorectal cancer survivors were recruited to the Assessment of Patient Experiences of Cancer Care study between April 2003 and November 2004. Respondents were asked about their follow-up care experiences, including decision-making preferences, trust in physicians, self-efficacy, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and health appraisal. Unadjusted mean scores of trust and self-efficacy measures by decision preference group were examined. Multinomial logistic and linear regressions were conducted to examine predictors of decision-making preferences and the impact of decision-making preferences on HRQOL and health appraisal.

resultsWhile the majority of patients preferred shared decision-making (61.0 %), 16.1 % preferred to control their decisions and 22.1 % preferred physician control over decisions. Compared to the other groups, patients preferring physician control had greater trust in their physician (p < 0.001), similar self-efficacy for engaging in the decision-making process, and lower self-efficacy for taking responsibility over decisions (p < 0.001). There were no notable differences between decision-making groups on outcome measures.

conclusionPatients who prefer physicians to control decisions are as confident about participating in the decision-making process and experience similar health outcomes as those preferring greater decisional control. Physicians need to tailor their communication behavior to encourage participation and trust among all patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Findings from this study provide unique insights into the decision-making preferences of cancer patients during receipt of follow-up care, which remains an understudied phase of cancer care delivery. Results underscore the need for approaches to decision-making and patient engagement to become more nuanced and to encourage patients to participate in decision-making in ways they are most comfortable. Furthermore, physicians and health care professionals should foster environments that promote trust and clear communication regardless of patient decision-making styles.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient PreferencePhysician-Patient RelationsSelf EfficacyTrustAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPhysician's Role

Identifiers

PMID23892559
OpenAlexW1990677988

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.