ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020
Qualitative Study of Factors Affecting Patient, Caregiver and Physician Preferences for Treatment of Myeloma and Indolent Lymphoma.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Differences between physician and patient preferences for cancer treatments: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Multiple Myeloma Experiences and Preferences: A Mixed Methods Study of Patients and Care Partners in the United States.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Preferences of patients and physicians in the United States for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma treatments.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Treatment decision-making among patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer: A qualitative study.Oral oncology · 2021Article
- Differences in Lung Cancer Treatment Preferences Among Oncologists, Patients and Family Members: A Semi-Structured Qualitative Study in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe number of treatment options for myeloma and indolent lymphoma are expanding at an exponential rate, with few direct head-to-head comparisons on which to base efficacy measures. We sought to understand how patients, their caregivers and physicians weigh treatment characteristics in order to come to a decision on which treatment option to pursue.
methodsPatients, their caregivers and physicians were recruited and interviewed until data saturation was reached. A qualitative, thematic analysis was done to identify themes important to each stakeholder.
resultsWe found that, while all three groups valued efficacy the most, the consideration of other secondary characteristics of the treatment, such as cost, toxicity and logistical issues all differed subtly between the different groups. Patients valued minimising cost and toxicity, even at small trade-offs in efficacy. Caregivers and physicians valued efficacy foremost.
conclusionAcknowledging and managing these differences is paramount because they influence shared decision-making and may affect patient outcomes in the short term, as well as their more general well-being in the long term.
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.