ArticleCureus2019
Assessing Patient Confidence and Satisfaction about the Shared Decision-making Meetings for Planning Cancer Chemotherapy.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship Between Online Health Information Acquisition and Shared Decision-Making Among Patients With Diabetes: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Concerns raised by people treated for head and neck cancer: a secondary analysis of audiotaped consultations in a health services follow-up clinic.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Patients increasingly express the desire to be involved in their treatment decisions, especially in critical situations, such as cancer chemotherapy that increase a doctor's responsibility toward fulfilling these needs. This process may require more than one meeting with the patient to meet their expectations and satisfaction levels. This study aimed to assess the satisfaction levels in cancer patients, who received chemotherapy, about their decision-making and if they were able to make this decision during the first meeting with their physicians. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2017 on 106 cancer patients aged 18 years or above who were receiving chemotherapy at the day-care unit of King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The data were collected by a direct or telephonic interview using a structured questionnaire. The variables were studied across two groups of patients based on the patient's ability to make decision in the first meeting with their physician. Data were expressed as frequencies (percentage) and Pearson Chi-Square test was used to assess the categorical variables. Results Out of the 106 patients, 42 (39.6%) of them were male. Ninety-one (85.8%) patients took the decision by themselves. Regarding the decision-making 90 (84.9%) patients were able to make the decision from the first meeting. Sixty-eight (64.2%) patients felt more satisfied if they had an additional session. There was a significant association between patients with the ability to make the decision during the first meeting and patients who took the decision by themselves (P = 0.033), patients with consideration of changing their decision if they had more meetings (P = 0.005), patients with consideration of withholding from chemotherapy in their mind (P = 0.019) and patients with thought that chemotherapy is affecting their life (P = 0.044). Conclusion The majority of the patients felt that more than one meeting with their doctors would be helpful in improving their satisfaction level during the decision-making process, consideration of withholding from chemotherapy in mind and that chemotherapy is affecting their life style. Future protocol in which the patients will be encouraged to have a confidence role on their treatment decision is recommended.
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.