ArticleJournal of psychosocial oncology research and practice2020
Single cases from multiple perspectives: a qualitative study comparing the experiences of patients, patients' caregivers, surgeons, and nurses when bad news is delivered about cancer.
Article in Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer patients' experiences and preferences when receiving bad news: a qualitative study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Communicating bad news in the practice of nursing: an integrative review.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2022Review
- Article
- "Imagine You Have ALS": Death Education to Prepare for Advance Treatment Directives.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Literature Review of Nurses Challenges and Barriers in Assisting Patients and Families Facing Breaking Bad News.Indian journal of palliative careReview
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
backgroundQualitative literature on the experiences of those delivering and receiving bad news about cancer has revealed what these parties consider important during the process across many different patient cases. The current study aims to add to this understanding by employing a "linked case" study design to directly compare the perspectives of patients, their caregivers, and health care professionals (HCPs) involved in a series of single-patient cases of breaking bad news.
methodSemistructured interviews were conducted with 13 participants (5 patients, 4 caregivers, 2 surgeons, and 2 nurses) who formed 5 linked cases. Interviews were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and directly compared within each linked case.
resultsAnalyses identified 2 main superordinate themes. The first labeled "accurately perceiving and responding to needs," included HCPs recognizing and responding to patients' and caregivers' individual emotional and informational needs. The second labeled "carers fulfilling necessary roles," identified the various roles HCPs and patients' caregivers took to satisfactorily meet patients' needs.
conclusionsThe findings suggest the importance of HCPs accurately perceiving and responding to patients' and caregivers' various needs and caregivers ability and willingness to fulfilling support roles in a way that aligns with their own resources and patients' needs. This highlights the value of HCPs developing and applying interpersonal skills within bad news encounters, working as a team, and exploring caregivers' resources for patient support.
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.