ReviewHNO2020
[Treatment decisions in oncology : Walking the tightrope between honesty and hope, lifetime, and quality of life].
Review in HNO, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA cancer diagnosis is always associated with a threat to life and therefore demands a great deal of the decision maker. For patients, this means making decisions under high emotional stress. On the other hand, medical facts can limit freedom of choice. For interactions with the patient in medical practice, this often means a balancing act between honesty and hope.
objectiveThis article aims to present factors that influence medical decisions in the area of conflict between ethical and moral obligations towards the patient and the daily routine of oncological care. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe current study is a narrative review.
resultsThere are different decision models and decision principles, all of which are influenced by the physician-patient relationship. In oncology, informing patents with regard to lifetime and quality of life is particularly demanding. Sometimes a balancing act between honesty and hope must be made.
conclusionIn every treatment situation but particularly in the palliative situation, open and honest communication is absolutely necessary. It must be ensured that the patient receives all the necessary information, understands it, and includes it in the decision-making process. An emphatic but clear naming of the medical facts allows the patient to maintain his autonomy and dignity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32161976What 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.