Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28585884›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2017

Conveying hope in consultations with patients with life-threatening diseases: the balance between supporting and challenging the patient.

Anne Werner, Sissel Steihaug

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

2 authors.

Anne Wernera Health Service Research Unit, Akershus University Hospital , Lørenskog , Norway.
Sissel Steihaugb SINTEF Technology and Society , Oslo , Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThere is limited knowledge about the communication of hope and denial in consultations with patients with life-threatening diseases on a practical level. In this study, we explored a real-life medical consultation between a doctor and a patient with incurable cancer, focusing on conveying hope. DESIGN AND

methodsWe found one consultation especially suited for illustrating how a physician can convey and reinforce hope without attaching it to curative treatment. The consultation was analysed using a method for discourse analysis, where we took as a point of departure that discourse means language in use.

resultsThe doctor communicated in a recognising manner, expressing respect for the patient as a subject and an authority of his own experiences. The doctor and patient succeeded in creating a good working alliance characterised by warmth and trust. Within this context, there was room for the doctor to challenge the patient's views and communicate disagreement.

conclusionsThe doctor succeeds in conveying and maintaining hope. Within a good working alliance with the patient the doctor can convey hope by balancing between supporting and challenging him. Exploring and grasping the patient's real concerns is essential for being able to relieve and comfort him and convey hope.

Indexed as

HopePhysician-Patient RelationsReferral and ConsultationCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsNorwayDoctor–patient communicationhopelife-threatening diseaseNorwayqualitative methodrecognition

Identifiers

PMID28585884
PMCPMC5499314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.