Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29187237›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2017

"It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be": a qualitative study of early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients after treatment.

Sara E Golden, Charles R Thomas, Mark E Deffebach, Mithran S Sukumar, Paul H Schipper, Brandon H Tieu, Andrew Y Kee, Andrew C Tsen, Christopher G Slatore, Early Stage Lung Cancer Comparative Effectiveness Research Consortium

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sara E GoldenHealth Services Research & Development, VA Portland Health Care System, 3710 SW US Veterans Hospital Rd., R&D 66, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. sara.golden1@va.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0536-5853
Charles R ThomasDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Mark E DeffebachDepartment of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Mithran S SukumarDepartment of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Paul H SchipperDepartment of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Brandon H TieuDepartment of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Andrew Y KeeDivision of Radiation Oncology, Legacy Health System, Portland, OR, USA.
Andrew C TsenDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Legacy Health System, Portland, OR, USA.
Christopher G SlatoreHealth Services Research & Development, VA Portland Health Care System, 3710 SW US Veterans Hospital Rd., R&D 66, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Early Stage Lung Cancer Comparative Effectiveness Research Consortium
Oregon Health & Science University · USLegacy Health · USVA Portland Health Care System · US

Funding

HSRD VA CDA 09-025Radiation Oncology Institute ROI2013-915
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWhile surgical resection is recommended for most patients with early stage lung cancer, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being increasingly utilized. Provider-patient communication regarding risks/benefits of each approach may be a modifiable factor leading to improved patient-centered outcomes. Our objective was to determine a framework and recommended strategies on how to best communicate with patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the post-treatment setting. We qualitatively evaluated the experiences of 11 patients with early clinical stage NSCLC after treatment, with a focus on treatment experience, knowledge obtained, communication, and recommendations. We used conventional content analysis and a patient-centered communication theoretical model to guide our understanding.

resultsFive patients received surgery and six received SBRT. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated. Few participants reported communication deficits around receiving follow-up information, although several had remaining questions about their treatment outcome (mainly those who underwent SBRT). They described feeling anxious regarding their first surveillance CT scan and clinician visit. Overall, participants remained satisfied with care because of implicit trust in their clinicians rather than explicit communication. Communication gaps remain but may be addressed by a trusting relationship with the clinician. Patients recommend clinicians give thorough explanations and personalize when possible.

Indexed as

AgedCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPatient SatisfactionQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeRadiosurgeryCommunicationPatient-centered outcomesThoracic diseases

Identifiers

PMID29187237
PMCPMC5708159
OpenAlexW2770184694

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.