Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31062280›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2020

Trust but Verify: Exploring the Role of Treatment-Related Information and Patient-Physician Trust in Shared Decision Making Among Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Soumya J Niranjan, Audrey Wallace, Beverly R Williams, Yasemin Turkman, Courtney P Williams, Smita Bhatia, Sara Knight, Gabrielle B Rocque

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Decision-making experiences of breast cancer patients related to contralateral prophylactic mastectomy-a systematic meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Soumya J NiranjanUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA. soumya14@uab.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9477-9187
Audrey WallaceUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.
Beverly R WilliamsUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.
Yasemin TurkmanUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.
Courtney P WilliamsUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.
Smita BhatiaUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.
Sara KnightUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Gabrielle B RocqueUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, 540A, Birmingham, AL, 35294-1212, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An ideal model for decision making in cancer is shared decision-making (SDM). Primary facilitators in this model are information-seeking about treatment options and patient-physician trust. Previous studies have investigated the role of each of these parameters individually. However, little is known about their convergent role in treatment decision-making. Therefore, we explored perspectives of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients and healthcare professionals about the influence of health information-seeking and physician trust in the SDM process. Qualitative interviews with 20 MBC patients and 6 community oncologists, as well as 3 separate focus groups involving lay navigators, nurses, and academic oncologists, were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Qualitative data analysis employed a content analysis approach, which included a constant comparative method to generate themes from the transcribed textual data. Five emergent themes were identified (1) physicians considered themselves as the patients' primary source of treatment information; (2) patients trusted their physician's treatment recommendations; (3) patients varied in their approach to seeking further health information regarding the discussed treatment options (e.g., internet websites, family and friends, support groups); (4) other healthcare professionals were cognizant of their fundamental role in facilitating further information-seeking; and (5) patient and physician discordant perspectives on shared decision making were present. Patient procurement of treatment information and the capacity to use it effectively in conjunction with patient trust in physicians play an important role in the shared decision-making process.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesPatient ParticipationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOncologistsQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesShared decision making (SDM), Metastatic breast cancer (MBC), Treatment information, Trust inphysicians

Identifiers

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.