Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28728498›Full record

ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2017

Variations in Unrealistic Optimism Between Acceptors and Decliners of Early Phase Cancer Trials.

Lynn A Jansen, Daruka Mahadevan, Paul S Appelbaum, William M P Klein, Neil D Weinstein, Motomi Mori, Catherine Degnin, Daniel P Sulmasy

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

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

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Lynn A Jansen1 Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Daruka Mahadevan2 The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Paul S Appelbaum3 Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
William M P Klein4 National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Neil D Weinstein5 Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Motomi Mori1 Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Catherine Degnin1 Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Daniel P Sulmasy6 Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

Understanding the origins of rapid recurrence of pancreatic cancer after resectionP30CA069533 · NCI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Luiz Eduardo Bertassoni · 1997 to 2026
$60.5M
Understanding Therapeutic Optimism and its Impact on Risk-Benefit AssessmentR01CA166556 · NCI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI JANSEN, LYNN ALEXANDRA · 2012 to 2016
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA069533NCI NIH HHS R01 CA166556
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research has found that patient-subjects in early phase cancer trials exhibit unrealistic optimism regarding the risks and possible benefits of trial participation. Unrealistic optimism is associated with therapeutic misconception and failures to appreciate research-related information. This is the first study to assess whether those who decline to participate in these trials also exhibit unrealistic optimism. It is also the first study to assess whether there are significant differences in appreciation of research-related risks/benefits and therapeutic misconception between these two groups. We approached 261 patients at two academic medical centers who were offered enrollment in a Phase I, II, or I/II cancer trial (between 2012 and 2016). Two hundred thirty-three patients agreed to enroll in an early phase cancer trial, 171 of whom agreed to be interviewed for the study. Twenty-eight patients declined the offer to enroll, 15 of whom agreed to be interviewed for the study. Subjects participated in a structured face-to-face interview with a research associate trained to administer the study questionnaires. Acceptors demonstrated a significantly higher level of unrealistic optimism than decliners ( p < .05). Decliners had significantly less therapeutic misconception than acceptors (3.37 [ SD = 0.85] vs. 3.79 [ SD = 0.77], p = .042). There was a significant difference on one of the appreciation questions between acceptors and decliners ( p = .009). Comparative assessment of acceptors and decliners to early phase cancer trials casts light on whether unrealistic optimism is consequential for the decision to participate in these trials. The different levels of unrealistic optimism exhibited by these groups suggest that it may be a factor that affects the decision to participate.

Indexed as

ComprehensionHopeInformed ConsentPatient SelectionTherapeutic MisconceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsResearch Subjectsappreciationearly phase cancer trialsethicsinformed consenttherapeutic misconceptionunrealistic optimism

Identifiers

PMID28728498
PMCPMC6020823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.