ArticlePatient education and counseling2020
The duality of option-listing in cancer care.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- How doctors present treatment options in advanced lung cancer consultations: a conversation analytic study.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- The Role of Health Care Communication in Treatment Outcomes.Annual review of linguistics · 2023Article
- Decision-making ethics in regards to life-sustaining interventions: when physicians refer to what other patients decide.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Death and the treatment imperative: Decision-making in late-stage cancer.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Article
- BeingFrontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Characterizing How Pediatric Clinicians Create Choice Awareness When Performing Shared Decision-Making.Academic pediatricsObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveListing more than one option for treatment, termed "option-listing" (OL) is one way to facilitate shared decision-making. We seek to evaluate how oncologists do option-listing in clinical encounters across disease contexts.
methodWe coded and transcribed 90 video-recorded interactions between 5 oncologist participants and a convenience sample of 82 patients at 2 large clinics in the western U.S. We used conversation analytic (CA) methods to examine patterns of behavior when oncologists provided more than one treatment option to patients.
resultsIn early-stage disease, OL provides patients with options while at the same time constraining those options through expression of physician bias. This effect disappears when cancer is at an advanced stage. In this context, OL is presented without physician preference and demonstrates recission of medical authority.
conclusionIn early-stage contexts, OL functions as a way for physicians to array available options to patients while also communicating their expertise. In advanced-stage contexts, OL functions as a way to minimize treatment options and highlight dwindling possibilities. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: OL is one way to implement shared decision-making, but it can also be used to facilitate a realization that treatment choices are diminishing and disease is progressing beyond a cure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.