ArticleThe oncologist2015
A National Survey to Systematically Identify Factors Associated With Oncologists' Attitudes Toward End-of-Life Discussions: What Determines Timing of End-of-Life Discussions?
Article in The oncologist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 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
- A randomized trial of mail and email recruitment strategies for a physician survey on clinical trial accrual.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Trial
- Factors in oncologists' attitudes on do-not-attempt-resuscitation orders for patients with cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- End-of-life discussions, preference concordance, and good death: insights from a nationwide mortality follow-back survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Observational
- Early and late code status documentation in cancer patients managed by a dedicated supportive care team.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Preferences of bereaved family members on communication with physicians when discontinuing anticancer treatment: referring to the concept of nudges.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Unrealistic expectations and disclosure of incurability in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- The trajectory of prognostic cognition in patients with advanced cancer: is the traditional advance care planning approach desirable for patients?Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Elements of End-of-Life Discussions Associated With Patients' Reported Outcomes and Actual End-of-Life Care in Patients With Pretreated Lung Cancer.The oncologist · 2024Observational
- Physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices on advance care planning for patients with advanced cancer in a National University Hospital in the Philippines.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Article
- Communication in Cancer Care in Asia: A Narrative Review.JCO global oncology · 2023Review
- Advance care planning in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes.Journal of geriatric oncology · 2023Article
- End-of-life care for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients with acute exacerbation.Respiratory research · 2022Article
- Difficulties Facing Junior Physicians and Solutions Toward Delivering End-of-Life Care for Patients with Cancer: A Nationwide Survey in Japan.Palliative medicine reports · 2022Article
- Impact of Augmented Intelligence on Utilization of Palliative Care Services in a Real-World Oncology Setting.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Factors associated with distinct prognostic-awareness-transition patterns over cancer patients' last 6 months of life.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Reimbursement Matters: Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Trial Accrual.Medical care · 2021Article
- Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2021Article
- Current Status of Advance Care Planning and End-of-life Communication for Patients with Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer.The oncologist · 2021Article
- Impact on place of death in cancer patients: a causal exploration in southern Switzerland.BMC palliative care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnd-of-life discussions (EOLds) occur infrequently until cancer patients become terminally ill.
methodsTo identify factors associated with the timing of EOLds, we conducted a nationwide survey of 864 medical oncologists. We surveyed the timing of EOLds held with advanced cancer patients regarding prognosis, hospice, site of death, and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status; and we surveyed physicians' experience of EOLds, perceptions of a good death, and beliefs regarding these issues. Multivariate analyses identified determinants of early discussions.
resultsAmong 490 physicians (response rate: 57%), 165 (34%), 65 (14%), 47 (9.8%), and 20 (4.2%) would discuss prognosis, hospice, site of death, and DNR status, respectively, "now" (i.e., at diagnosis) with a hypothetical patient with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer. In multivariate analyses, determinants of discussing prognosis "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of autonomy in experiencing a good death (odds ratio [OR]: 1.34; p = .014), less perceived difficulty estimating the prognosis (OR: 0.77; p = .012), and being a hematologist (OR: 1.68; p = .016). Determinants of discussing hospice "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.58; p = .018), less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.67; p = .002), and no responsibility as treating physician at end of life (OR: 1.94; p = .031). Determinants of discussing site of death "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.83; p = .008) and less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.74; p = .034). The determinant of discussing DNR status "now" was less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.49; p = .003).
conclusionReflection by oncologists on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death is helpful for oncologists to perform appropriate EOLds. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Oncologists' own perceptions about what is important for a "good death," perceived difficulty in estimating the prognosis, and discomfort in talking about death influence their attitudes toward end-of-life discussions. Reflection on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death are important for improving oncologists' skills in facilitating end-of-life discussions.
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.