Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33166406›Full record

Observational studyBlood advances2020

Decisional involvement and information preferences of patients with hematologic malignancies.

Kah Poh Loh, Mazie Tsang, Thomas W LeBlanc, Anthony Back, Paul R Duberstein, Supriya Gupta Mohile, Ronald M Epstein, Heidi D Klepin, Michael W Becker, Areej El-Jawahri and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Blood advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Heterogeneity and associated factors of information needs among patients with hematological malignancies in China: a latent profile analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  5. More than "hematology": a qualitative study on the experience of hematologists treating people with blood cancer in Greece.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Kah Poh LohJames P. Wilmot Cancer Institute, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Mazie TsangHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Thomas W LeBlancDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Anthony BackClinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA.
Paul R DubersteinDepartment of Health Behavior, Society, and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ.
Supriya Gupta MohileJames P. Wilmot Cancer Institute, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Ronald M EpsteinJames P. Wilmot Cancer Institute, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Heidi D KlepinSection on Hematology and Oncology, Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Winston-Salem, NC; and.
Michael W BeckerJames P. Wilmot Cancer Institute, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Areej El-JawahriDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA.
Stephanie J LeeClinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA.

Funding

URCC NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189961 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Michelle C Janelsins, KAREN M. MUSTIAN · 2014 to 2026
$67.7M
RESEARCH TRAINING IN GERIATRIC MEDICINET32AG000212 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Alexander Keliimoeanu Smith · 1991 to 2026
$7.7M
Geriatric Oncology Research Infrastructure to Improve Clinical CareR33AG059206 · NIA · BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE/CITY OF HOPE · PI WILLIAM DALE, Heidi Diana Klepin · 2020 to 2026
$5.1M
A Patient-Oriented Research Program in Geriatric OncologyK24AG056589 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Supriya G. Mohile · 2018 to 2026
$1.5M
A Novel Mobile Health Exercise Intervention for Older Patients with Myeloid NeoplasmsK99CA237744 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI LOH, KAH POH · 2019 to 2020
$385k
NCI NIH HHS K99 CA237744NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189961NIA NIH HHS K24 AG056589NIA NIH HHS R33 AG059206NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding decisional involvement and information preferences in patients with hematologic malignancies may help to optimize physician-patient communication about treatment decisions and align the decision-making processes with patients' preferences. We described and examined factors associated with preferences of patients with hematologic malignancies for decisional involvement, information sources, and presentation of information. In a multicenter observational study, we recruited 216 patients with hematologic malignancies of any stage from September 2003 to June 2007. Patients were asked about their decisional involvement preferences (Control Preferences Scale), information sources (including most useful source of information), and preferences for their oncologists' presentation of treatment success information. We used multivariate logistic regressions to identify factors associated with decisional involvement preferences and usefulness of information sources (physicians vs nonphysicians). Patient-directed, shared, and physician-directed approaches were preferred in 34%, 38%, and 28% of patients, respectively. Physicians and computer/Internet were the most common information sources; 42% perceived physicians as the most useful source. On multivariate analysis, patients with less than a college education (vs postgraduate education) were less likely to perceive their physician as the most useful source (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21-1.00), whereas patients with acute leukemia (vs other blood cancers) were more likely to perceive their physician as the most useful source (AOR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.07-5.80). In terms of communicating treatment success rates, 70% preferred ≥1 method(s), and 88% preferred presentation in percentages. Our study suggests that decisional involvement and information preferences vary and should be assessed explicitly as part of each decision-making encounter.

Indexed as

Decision MakingHematologic NeoplasmsHumansPatient PreferencePatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID33166406
PMCPMC7656941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.