Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28243695›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2017

Regret in Surgical Decision Making: A Systematic Review of Patient and Physician Perspectives.

Ana Wilson, Sean M Ronnekleiv-Kelly, Timothy M Pawlik

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Factors influencing decision regret regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women at high risk of hereditary breast cancer: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ana WilsonDepartment of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sean M Ronnekleiv-KellyDepartment of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Timothy M PawlikDepartment of Surgery, The Urban Meyer III and Shelley Meyer Chair for Cancer Research, Wexner Medical Center, The Ohio State University, 395 W. 12th Ave., Suite 670, Columbus, OH, USA. tim.pawlik@osumc.edu.
Johns Hopkins University · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRegret is a powerful motivating factor in medical decision making among patients and surgeons. Regret can be particularly important for surgical decisions, which often carry significant risk and may have uncertain outcomes. We performed a systematic review of the literature focused on patient and physician regret in the surgical setting.

methodsA search of the English literature between 1986 and 2016 that examined patient and physician self-reported decisional regret was carried out using the MEDLINE/PubMed and Web of Science databases. Clinical studies performed in patients and physicians participating in elective surgical treatment were included.

resultsOf 889 studies identified, 73 patient studies and 6 physician studies met inclusion criteria. Among the 73 patient studies, 57.5% examined patients with a cancer diagnosis, with breast (26.0%) and prostate (28.8%) cancers being most common. Interestingly, self-reported patient regret was relatively uncommon with an average prevalence across studies of 14.4%. Factors most often associated with regret included type of surgery, disease-specific quality of life, and shared decision making. Only 6 studies were identified that focused on physician regret; 2 pertained to surgical decision making. These studies primarily measured regret of omission and commission using hypothetical case scenarios and used the results to develop decision curve analysis tools.

conclusionSelf-reported decisional regret was present in about 1 in 7 surgical patients. Factors associated with regret were both patient- and procedure related. While most studies focused on patient regret, little data exist on how physician regret affects shared decision making.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to HealthDecision MakingSurgeonsSurgical Procedures, OperativeAdultAgedElective Surgical ProceduresEmotionsFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID28243695
OpenAlexW2592832375

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.