ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020
The Value of Hope: Patients' and Physicians' Preferences for Survival in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.
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 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Summary of present design of discrete choice experiments for patient preferences in lung cancer based on the ISPOR ESTIMATE checklist.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of decision tools during oncological consultation with lung cancer patients: A systematic review within the I3LUNG project.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The elicitation of quality of life preferences for lung cancer treatment from the perspective of patients and treating physicians: results of two discrete choice experiments.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Willingness to Pay for Treatment Attributes in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- Risk attitudes and value of hope: survey results from Japanese hematologists and oncologists treating patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Patient, Physician, and Caregiver Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- What Matters Most to Patients with NSCLC When Choosing Anticancer Treatments in China? A Best-Worst Scaling Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Oncologists' preferences for first-line treatment of ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC in the United States: a discrete choice experiment.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Patient and Physician Preferences for Maintenance Treatment in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Insights into Treatment Selection.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- The Degree of Acceptance of the Disease by Patients After a Diagnosis of Lung Cancer and Their Hope.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A tailored approach to horizon scanning for cancer medicines.Journal of cancer policy · 2023Article
- Patient preferences and shared decision making for the traditional Chinese medicine treatment of lung cancer: A discrete choice experiment study.Integrative medicine research · 2023Article
- Article
- Immunotherapy Versus Hospice: Treatment Decision-Making in the Modern Era of Novel Cancer Therapies.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- Physician Preferences and Shared-Decision Making for the Traditional Chinese Medicine Treatment of Lung Cancer: A Discrete-Choice Experiment Study in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImmuno-oncology treatments offer patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment options with greater probability of durable survival and a different toxicity profile compared with traditional chemotherapy. The objective of this study was to explore the importance of increases in the probability of long-term survival versus changes in expected (median) survival and treatment toxicities among patients with advanced NSCLC and physicians. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn a discrete-choice experiment, oncologists and patients diagnosed with NSCLC chose between profiles of treatments for advanced NSCLC offering different combinations of benefits (expected, best-case, and worst-case survival) and risks. We analyzed preference data from each sample using a random-parameters logit model that controls for preference heterogeneity and the panel nature of the data.
resultsBoth patients and physicians expressed a strong preference for improving the probability of best-case survival; however, patients viewed increases in the probability of long-term survival as more important than increases in expected survival, while the opposite was true for physicians. Both patients and physicians weighted survival to be more important than toxicities.
conclusionThis study identified a potentially important divergence between physician and patient perspectives on survival statistics. Physicians placed more importance on increases in expected survival than did patients with NSCLC. The importance patients placed on long-term survival reinforce previous research identifying the primacy of hope as a value among seriously ill patients. The findings underscore the importance of considering patients' priorities and in shared decision-making when choosing treatment.
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.