ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2017
Cancer patients' control preferences in decision making and associations with patient-reported outcomes: a prospective study in an outpatient cancer center.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Can electronic assessment tools improve the process of shared decision-making? A systematic review.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of a shared decision-making implementation programme on patient-centred communication in oncology-Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Trial
- Evaluation of a program for routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: results of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2021Trial
- When do we need to take action? Cut-off values for the hamburg inventory for measuring quality of life in oncological patients (HELP-6).Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Quality of life and functional outcomes after rectal sparing approaches following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort multicentre study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
- Decision-Making preferences in advanced cancer patients: associations with sociodemographic and psychological factors.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Bridging the care gap: patients' needs and experiences regarding shared decision-making in radiotherapy.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Mixed methods study of attitudes on location of gynaecological oncology outpatient care: a patient and healthcare professional questionnaire.BMJ open quality · 2024Review
- Describing Self-Advocacy in Underrepresented Women With Advanced Cancer.Oncology nursing forum · 2023Article
- Self-advocacy Behaviors and Needs in Women with Advanced Cancer: Assessment and Differences by Patient Characteristics.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a short instrument for measuring health-related quality of life in oncological patients in routine care (HELP-6): an observational study.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Shared-Decision-Making Experiences in Breast Cancer Care with and without Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences: A Mixed-Methods-Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Shared decision making and patients satisfaction with strabismus care-a pilot study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Observational
- Impact, challenges and limits of inpatient palliative care consultations - perspectives of requesting and conducting physicians.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of encounter decision aids in breast cancer care.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2019Article
- Approaches to decision-making among late-stage melanoma patients: a multifactorial investigation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Article
- Psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in oncology practice.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose"Shared decision making" has been proposed as a prerequisite of patient-centered care. However, little is known on factors, which may influence cancer patients' decision control preferences (DCP) in routine care. This study investigated possible determinants of the patients' DCP with respect to patient characteristics and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).
methodsConsecutive patients presenting at a comprehensive cancer center between May 2014 and October 2014 were offered a self-administered electronic questionnaire including standardized PRO measures and patients' DCP. Results were linked with patient characteristics from the hospital information system and analyzed using cross-sectional methods.
resultsOut of 126 patients participating, 102 (81%; 65% male; mean age 62 years) completed the DCP-item. Overall, 49% (n = 50) preferred shared treatment decision responsibility, 29% (n = 30) preferred to leave the control to his/her physician, whereas 22% (n = 22) preferred to be in control of his/her treatment decision. Higher age (p = 0.035) and elevated distress levels (p = 0.038) were significantly associated with an increased willingness to leave the decision control to the physician. Further sociodemographic and PRO measures were not associated with patients' DCP.
conclusionOur findings demonstrate that DCP assessment in routine cancer care is possible and provides important information to the treating oncologist. Information on DCP combined with PRO may contribute to more individualized decision making in cancer care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28357651What 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.