ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017
The evolution of uncertainty in second opinions about prostate cancer treatment.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review update.European journal of cancer care · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review of illness uncertainty management interventions for cancer patients and their family caregivers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Patient-Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review.The oncologist · 2017Pooled it
- Identifying best practices for disclosure of amyloid imaging results: A randomized controlled trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Trial
- Clinicians' Perception and Management of Cancer Patients' Decision Making Burden.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Patient-driven second opinions in oncology: a review.The oncologist · 2026Review
- Benefits and challenges of asynchronous telemedicine in obtaining a second opinion: a qualitative interview study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Cancer Patients' Experiences of Burden when Involved in Treatment Decision Making.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- Does the second opinion directive in Germany reach the patient? A parallel-convergent mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Attitude toward second opinions in Germany - a survey of the general population.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Informing Patients With Esophagogastric Cancer About Treatment Outcomes by Using a Web-Based Tool and Training: Development and Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 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
- Analysis of second opinion programs provided by German statutory and private health insurance - a survey of statutory and private health insurers.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Oncologists' Communication About Uncertain Information in Second Opinion Consultations: A Focused Qualitative Analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Communicating uncertainties when disclosing diagnostic test results for (Alzheimer's) dementia in the memory clinic: The ABIDE project.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Observational
- Cause or Effect? The Role of Prognostic Uncertainty in the Fear of Cancer Recurrence.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Clinicians' communication with patients receiving a MCI diagnosis: The ABIDE project.PloS one · 2020Article
- The evolution of uncertainty in second opinions about prostate cancer treatment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople who have cancer increasingly seek second opinions. Yet, we know little about what motivates patients to seek them and how beneficial they are. Uncertainty-experienced by patients or communicated by physician and patient-may be crucial throughout the second opinion process.
objectiveThis study sought to investigate (1) how uncertainty influences men with prostate cancer to seek second opinions and (2) how second opinions may affect these patients' sense of uncertainty and subsequent experiences with their care.
methodsA qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was performed. Men with localized or advanced prostate cancer (n=23) were interviewed by telephone about their motivations and experiences with seeking second opinions and the uncertainties they experienced. Analysis was performed using the constant comparative method.
resultsPatients sought second opinions because they were uncertain about receiving too little or biased information, experienced insufficient support in coming to a treatment decision, or because physicians expressed different levels of uncertainty than they did ("unshared uncertainty"). Uncertainty was reduced by the second opinion process for most patients, whereas for others, it increased or was sustained. This evolution depended on the way uncertainty was addressed during the second opinion consultation.
conclusionsSecond opinions may be a useful tool for some but not all patients. They should be used judiciously and not be viewed as a solution for current limitations to health-care organization. An important yet challenging task for physicians is to focus less on information per se and more on how to assist patients manage irreducible uncertainty.
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.