ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2021
Shared decision-making for prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: an exploratory study.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07164365 (Decisional Conflict in Patients With Advanced Cancer in a Shared Decision-Making Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Decisional Conflict in Patients With Advanced Cancer in a Shared Decision-Making Model: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Heidelberg Decision Aid for Patients With Lung Cancer (HELP)—Findings of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Trial
- The impact of shared decision-making on patient-reported outcomes in Traditional Chinese Medicine in Shanghai, China: a cross-sectional study using structural equation modeling.Integrative medicine research · 2026Article
- Paving the Way for CCK2R-Targeted Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy with [Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Improving Patient Engagement in Phase 2 Clinical Trials With a Trial-Specific Patient Decision Aid: Development and Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Construction of a nomogram to guide prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive‑stage small cell lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- Current dilemma and future directions over prophylactic cranial irradiation in SCLC: a systematic review in MRI and immunotherapy era.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProphylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) offers extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients a lower chance of brain metastasis and slightly longer survival but is associated with a short-term decline in quality of life due to side-effects. This tradeoff between survival and quality of life makes PCI suitable for shared decision-making (SDM), where patients and clinicians make treatment decisions together based on clinical evidence and patient preferences. Despite recent clinical practice guidelines recommending SDM for PCI in ES-SCLC, as well as the heavy disease burden, research into SDM for lung cancer has been scarce. This exploratory study presents patients' experiences of the SDM process and decisional conflict for PCI.
methodsRadiation oncologists (n=7) trained in SDM applied it in making the PCI decision with ES-SCLC patients (n=25). We measured patients' preferred level of participation (Control Preferences Scale), the level of SDM according to both groups (SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc), and patients' decisional conflict [decisional conflict scale (DCS)].
resultsSeventy-nine percent of patients preferred a collaborative role in decision-making, and median SDM scores given by patients and clinicians were 80 (IQR: 75.6-91.1) and 85.2 (IQR: 78.7-88.9) respectively, indicating satisfaction with the process. However, patients experienced considerable decisional conflict. Over 50% lacked clarity about which choice was suitable for them and were unsure what to choose. Sixty-four percent felt they did not know enough about the harms and benefits of PCI, and 60% felt unable to judge the importance of the harms/benefits in their life.
conclusionsES-SCLC patients prefer to be involved in their treatment choice for PCI but a substantial portion experiences decisional conflict. Better information provision and values clarification may support patients in making a choice that reflects their preferences.
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.