ArticleOncology nursing forum2015
Involvement in Decision Making and Satisfaction With Treatment Among Partners of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Localized Prostate Cancer
Article in Oncology nursing forum, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient and family communication during consultation visits: The effects of a decision aid for treatment decision-making for localized prostate cancer.Patient education and counseling · 2017Trial
- Factors underlying treatment decision-making for localized prostate cancer in the U.S. and Canada: A scoping review using principal component analysis.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2019Article
- Non-pharmacological and non-surgical strategies to promote sexual recovery for men with erectile dysfunction.Translational andrology and urology · 2017Review
- eHealth Literacy and Partner Involvement in Treatment Decision Making for Men With Newly Diagnosed Localized Prostate CancerOncology nursing forum · 2017Article
- Influence of Men's Personality and Social Support on Treatment Decision-Making for Localized Prostate Cancer.BioMed research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PURPOSE/
objectivesTo examine partner involvement in treatment decision making for localized prostate cancer, congruence between partner involvement and patient preference, reasons for partner noninvolvement, and partner satisfaction with patient treatment .
designCross-sectional exploratory study.
setting100 counties in North Carolina. SAMPLE: 281 partners of men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer.
methodsParticipants completed a phone survey. Logistic regression analyses were used. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Partners' involvement in treatment decision making, partner satisfaction with treatment, activities of partner involvement, and reasons for noninvolvement.
findingsOf the 228 partners (81%) related to decision making, 205 (73%) were very satisfied with the treatment the patients received, and partner involvement was congruent with patient preference in 242 partners (86%). Partners reported several reasons for noninvolvement.
conclusionsMost partners engaged in multiple activities during treatment decision making for localized prostate cancer and were satisfied with the patient's treatment. Partner involvement was mostly congruent with patient preference. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Partners' active involvement in treatment decision making for localized prostate cancer (e.g., being involved in patients' conversations with doctors) should be encouraged and facilitated for those who prefer this type of decision making. .
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.