Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28606972›Full record

SynthesisThe oncologist2017

Patient-Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review.

Marij A Hillen, Niki M Medendorp, Joost G Daams, Ellen M A Smets

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The oncologist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 18 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

67 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. The Impact of Sports Involvement on Body Image Perception and Ideals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  9. Physical Activity and Body Image Perception in Adolescents: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Communicating treatment risks and benefits to cancer patients: a systematic review of communication methods.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Effects of Prior Diagnosis on Second Opinions and Pathologist Viewing Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Trial in Breast Pathology.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Trial
  20. Article

7 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

4 authors.

Marij A HillenDepartment of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands M.A.Hillen@amc.uva.nl.
Niki M MedendorpDepartment of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Joost G DaamsMedical Library, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ellen M A SmetsDepartment of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough patient-driven second opinions are increasingly sought in oncology, the desirability of this trend remains unknown. Therefore, this systematic review assesses evidence on the motivation for and frequency of requests for second opinions and examines how they evolve and their consequences for oncological practice. MATERIALS AND

methodsRelevant databases were sought using the terms "cancer," "second opinion," and "self-initiated." Included were peer-reviewed articles that reported on patient-initiated second opinions within oncology. Selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed and discussed by two researchers.

resultsOf the 25 included studies, the methodological designs were qualitative ( DISCUSSION: Additional studies are required to further examine the medical, practical, and psychological consequences of second opinions for patients and oncologists. Future studies could compare the potential advantages and disadvantages of second opinion seeking, and might offer guidance to patients and physicians to better facilitate the second opinion process. Some practical recommendations are provided for oncologists to optimally discuss and conduct second opinions with their patients.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMalePatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchReferral and ConsultationCancerPhysician‐patient relationsQuality of careReferral and consultationReviewSecond opinion

Identifiers

PMID28606972
PMCPMC5634767

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.