Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28636280›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2018

Getting on the same page: Communication, patient involvement and shared understanding of "decisions" in oncology.

Aaron L Leppin, Marleen Kunneman, Julie Hathaway, Cara Fernandez, Victor M Montori, Jon C Tilburt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Exploring Communication Dynamics Between Patients and Healthcare Providers in Oncology: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. How oncology teams can be patient-centred? opportunities for theoretical improvement through an empirical examination.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    Article
  5. Getting on the same page: Communication, patient involvement and shared understanding of "decisions" in oncology.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Article
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

6 authors.

Aaron L LeppinKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2468-5919
Marleen KunnemanKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Julie HathawayPatient Education, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Cara FernandezKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Victor M MontoriKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Jon C TilburtDivision of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

Mayo Clinic Center for Translational Science ActivitiesUL1TR000135 · NCATS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KHOSLA, SUNDEEP · 2012 to 2015
$41.2M
Assessing Patient Experience in Cancer Care: An Observational Communication StudyR01AT006515 · NCCIH · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI TILBURT, JON C · 2011 to 2015
$3.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000135NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT006515NIMHD NIH HHS L60 MD003788
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients and clinicians do not often agree on whether a decision has been made about cancer care. This could be explained by factors related to communication quality and/or the type of decision being made.

methodsWe used a self-developed coding scheme to code a random sample of 128 encounters in which patients and clinicians either agreed (n=64) or disagreed (n=64) that a cancer care decision was made and tested for associations between concordance and key communication behaviours. We also identified and characterized cancer care decisions by topic and level of patient involvement and looked for trends.

resultsWe identified 378 cancer care decisions across 128 encounters. Explicit decisions were most commonly made about topics wherein decision control could be easily delegated to a clear and present expert (eg either the patient or the clinician). Related to this, level of patient involvement varied significantly by decision topic. Explicit decisions were rarely made in an observable way about social, non-clinical or self-management related topics, although patients and clinicians both reported having made a cancer care decision in encounters where no decisions were observed. We found no association between communication behaviours and concordance in our sample.

conclusionsWhat counts as a "decision" in cancer care may be constructed within disparate social roles that leave many agendas unaddressed and decisions unmade. Changing the content of conversations to encourage explicit decisions about self-management and life context-related topics may have greater value in enabling shared understanding than promoting communication behaviours among already high-performing communicators.

Indexed as

Decision MakingMedical OncologyPatient ParticipationPhysician-Patient RelationsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmscancer communicationdecision makingoncologypatient-clinician concordanceshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID28636280
PMCPMC5750732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.