SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016
Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Patient-Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review.The oncologist · 2017Pooled it
- Utility of a Referral Letter to Improve Comprehensibility of Cancer Patients in Palliative Care: a Single-Center Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018Trial
- Patient-driven second opinions in oncology: a review.The oncologist · 2026Review
- Effects of First Time Minimum Volume Regulation on the Surgical Treatment of Lung Cancer in Germany.Cancers · 2026Article
- Feasibility Study: Early Experiences With a Cancer Center's Virtual Expert Medical Opinion Program.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Impact of oncology review meetings on second opinions for patients with gastrointestinal cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Information and support for cancer patients and their relatives - evaluation of central contact point enquiries: a retrospective analysis.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Use of complementary therapies and supportive measures of patients with intracranial gliomas-a prospective evaluation in an outpatient clinic.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Benefits versus drawbacks of delaying surgery due to additional consultations in older patients with breast cancer.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Clinical value of second opinions in oncology: A retrospective review of changes in diagnosis and treatment recommendations.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Outcome and characteristics of patients with adult grade 4 diffuse gliomas changing sites of treatment.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Novel Program Offering Remote, Asynchronous Subspecialist Input in Thoracic Oncology: Early Experience and Insights Gained During the COVID-19 Pandemic.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Second opinions for spinal surgery: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Biasing Influence of 'Mental Shortcuts' on Diagnostic Decision-Making: Radiologists Can Overlook Breast Cancer in Mammograms When Prior Diagnostic Information Is Available.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- After COVID-19, telemedicine may be used in addition to usual care and not in lieu of: Implications for health systems.International journal of cancer · 2021Article
- Teaching Shared Decision Making to Undergraduate Medical Students.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2021Article
- Relationship between Consulting for Second Medical Opinions, Radiotherapy, and Satisfaction with Therapy, Analyzed by Structural Equation Modeling: A Web-Based Survey.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Article
- Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith growing complexity of diagnostics and therapy, as well as increasing involvement of patients in the decision-making process, there is more and more demand for second opinions in oncology. This literature review aims at analyzing the benefits and risks involved, as well as the tools needed to establish a structured program for second opinion within a modern healthcare system.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Embase and the databases SocINDEX, ERIC and CINAHL. Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria and offered a relevant insight into the topic of second opinions.
resultsDepending on the study, between 6.5 and 36 % of patients search for a second opinion, due to a variety of reasons. Changes in diagnosis, treatment recommendations or prognosis as a result of the second opinion occurred in 12-69 % of cases. In 43-82 % of cases, the original diagnosis or treatment was verified. Patient satisfaction was high, and the second opinion was deemed as helpful and reassuring in most cases. Yet, data on patient-relevant outcomes or on the quality of the second opinion are missing.
conclusionIn general, outcome data on second opinion are divergent and scarce. Yet, with patients' demand for second opinion and influence of second opinion on treatment decisions, a structured, high quality and transparent second-opinion program seems mandatory. Such a program may support patient-physician communication and improve the flow of information, as well as decision-making. Its evaluation should be independent from the provider of the second opinion.
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.