Observational studyPatient education and counseling2014
"Speaking-for" and "speaking-as": pseudo-surrogacy in physician-patient-companion medical encounters about advanced cancer.
Observational study in Patient education and counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Timing of prognostic discussions in people with advanced cancer: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- The role of a companion attending consultations with the patient. A systematic review.Irish journal of medical science · 2019Pooled it
- Investigating the Factors Behind Patients' Desire and Decision to be Accompanied: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Healthcare provider assessments of caregiver communication behaviors during gynecologic Cancer treatment appointments.PEC innovation · 2024Article
- Assessing the association between quantity and quality of family caregiver participation in decision-making clinical encounters on patient activation in the metastatic breast cancer setting.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Assessing the Impact of Family Caregivers in Clinical Encounter Participation on Patient Activation in the Metastatic Breast Cancer Setting.Research square · 2023Article
- Fertility Preservation Decisional Turning Points for Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer: Exploring Alignment and Divergence by Race and Ethnicity.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Responsive social support serves important functions in clinical communication: Translating perspectives from relationship science to improve cancer clinical interactions.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Article
- Patient activation and treatment decision-making in the context of cancer: examining the contribution of informal caregivers' involvement.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
- How companions speak on patients' behalf without undermining their autonomy: Findings from a conversation analytic study of palliative care consultations.Sociology of health & illness · 2022Article
- Social networks of older patients with advanced cancer: Potential contributions of an integrated mixed methods network analysis.Journal of geriatric oncology · 2021Article
- BeingFrontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- "It is like living in a diminishing world": older persons' experiences of living with long-term health problems - prior to the STRENGTH intervention.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2020Article
- Article
- Decoding the Role of Companions in Supporting the Health Communication of Older African-American Men With Cancer.Journal of patient experience · 2020Article
- Patient-hematologist discordance in perceived chance of cure in hematologic malignancies: A multicenter study.Cancer · 2020Observational
- "Who'll do all these if I'm not around?": Bonding social capital and health and well-being of inpatients.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine using audio-recorded encounters the extent and process of companion participation when discussing treatment choices and prognosis in the context of a life-limiting cancer diagnosis.
methodsQualitative analysis of transcribed outpatient visits between 17 oncologists, 49 patients with advanced cancer, and 34 companions.
results46 qualifying companion statements were collected from a total of 28 conversations about treatment choices or prognosis. We identified a range of companion positions, from "pseudo-surrogacy" (companion speaking as if the patient were not able to speak for himself), "hearsay", "conflation of thoughts", "co-experiencing", "observation as an outsider", and "facilitation". Statements made by companions were infrequently directly validated by the patient.
conclusionCompanions often spoke on behalf of patients during discussions of prognosis and treatment choices, even when the patient was present and capable of speaking on his or her own behalf. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The conversational role of companions as well as whether the physician checks with the patient can determine whether a companion facilitates or inhibits patient autonomy and involvement. Physicians can reduce ambiguity and encourage patient participation by being aware of when and how companions may speak on behalf of patients and by corroborating the companion's statement with the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.