Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34521393›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2021

Addressing challenges in information-provision: a qualitative study among oncologists and women with advanced breast cancer.

Liesbeth M van Vliet, Maartje C Meijers, Sandra van Dulmen, Elsken van der Wall, Nicole Plum, Jacqueline Stouthard, Anneke L Francke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Shared decision-making needs, barriers, and facilitators of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer in the hospital: a multi-level, mixed-methods study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Liesbeth M van VlietHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, the Netherlands. l.m.van.vliet@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Maartje C MeijersHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Sandra van DulmenNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Elsken van der WallDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Nicole PlumDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jacqueline StouthardNetherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Anneke L FranckeNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Leiden University · NLNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLOncode Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for more insight into how to address challenges of information-provision for women with advanced breast cancer. We aimed to explore oncologists' and patients' views on (i) the challenges of information-provision, and (ii) possible strategies to address these challenges, meanwhile (iii) exploring the possible facilitating role of positive expectations and empathy.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were held with oncologists (n = 10) and women with advanced breast cancer (n = 14). Principles of Thematic Analysis were followed, with two researchers analyzing transcribed data, supported by Atlas.ti software.

resultsTaken together the data from oncologists and patients, we found that when communicating with patients with advanced cancer, oncologists face challenges, including handling patients' unrealistic disease (status) beliefs, and choosing approaches for discussing available treatment options and their side effects. Possible strategies to address these challenges include balancing information with acceptance of denial, and using medical expertise to guide treatment discussions. A sensitive issue is whether to discuss the option of no anti-cancer treatment. Meanwhile, approaches and preferences for discussions of side effects vary. Positive expectations and empathy can facilitate information-provision by creating space and helping patients to open up more.

conclusionsIntegrating oncologists' and patients' views, oncologists can provide realistic information while also, temporarily, accepting denial, and can use their medical expertise to address challenges around unrealistic beliefs and discussion of treatment options. Finding ways to tailor discussions of no anti-cancer treatment and side-effect information are needed. Positive expectations and empathy might facilitate - tailored - information-provision, leading ultimately to patient-centered care lying at the heart of medicine.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoplasmsOncologistsCommunicationEmpathyFemaleHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchBreast cancerCommunicationEmpathyIncurable cancerInformation-provisionQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID34521393
PMCPMC8442372
OpenAlexW3201034664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.