SynthesisBMJ open2021
Patient-initiated second medical consultations-patient characteristics and motivating factors, impact on care and satisfaction: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Type and Timing of Clinician-Facing AI Support on Patient Trust in Medical Consultations: 2 Vignette Experiments.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient-driven second opinions in oncology: a review.The oncologist · 2026Review
- Defensive Medical Practice in Dentistry: A Dual-Perspective Cross-Sectional Analysis of Dentists and Patients in Romania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Persistent use of body mass index policies as a barrier to surgery: Prevalence and analysis of policies across England in 2025.Journal of health services research & policy · 2026Article
- Everyone deserves a second chance: The importance of second opinions for left ventricular assist device candidacy.JHLT open · 2026Article
- Feasibility Study: Early Experiences With a Cancer Center's Virtual Expert Medical Opinion Program.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- One size does not fit all: data-driven insights of patient-reported outcomes to tailor supportive care in breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Two Heads Are Better Than One: Second Opinions and Collaborations in Oncology.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2026Article
- A New Approach to Cancer Second Opinions: Overcoming the Challenges of Conventional Oncology Practice by Providing Education to Patients and Physicians.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Article
- Hospital Transfer Between Primary and Secondary Metabolic Bariatric Surgery in The Netherlands: A Cross-sectional Multi-party Computation Analysis of Frequency and Associated Factors.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Second Opinion Referrals of Cancer Patients in Japan-A Nationwide Study.Cancer science · 2025Article
- Epidemiology of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in central and Western Pennsylvania.Respiratory research · 2025Article
- VIP syndrome in surgical oncology: ethical and clinical challenges in resource-limited settings.Oncology reviews · 2025Article
- Systematic Review of AI-Assisted MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Enhancing Accuracy Through Second Opinion Tools.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Adolescent Mental Health: A Focus on Psychiatric Counseling from the Emergency Room of an Italian University Hospital in the Five Years from 2019 to 2023.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Sources of diagnostic delay for people with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis: Qualitative research study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Does the second opinion directive in Germany reach the patient? A parallel-convergent mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Decision Paralysis: Recognition and Patient-Centered Discourse.Dermatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Second opinion opportunity declined: patient typology and experiences regarding the decision-making process preceding elective surgeries in Germany.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Second opinions for spinal surgery: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo review the characteristics and motivations of patients seeking second opinions, and the impact of such opinions on patient management, satisfaction and cost effectiveness. DATA SOURCES: Embase, Medline, PsycINFO and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) databases. STUDY
designA systematic literature search was performed for terms related to second opinion and patient characteristics. Study quality was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsWe included articles focused on patient-initiated second opinions, which provided quantitative data on their impact on diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or patient satisfaction, described the characteristics or motivating factors of patients who initiated a second opinion, or the cost-effectiveness of patient-initiated second opinions. PRINCIPAL
findingsThirty-three articles were included in the review. 29 studies considered patient characteristics, 19 patient motivating factors, 10 patient satisfaction and 17 clinical agreement between the first and second opinion. Seeking a second opinion was more common in women, middle-age patients, more educated patients; and in people having a chronic condition, with higher income or socioeconomic status or living in central urban areas. Patients seeking a second opinion sought to gain more information or reassurance about their diagnosis or treatment. While many second opinions confirm the original diagnosis or treatment, discrepancies in opinions had a potential major impact on patient outcomes in up to 58% of cases. No studies reported on the cost effectiveness of patient initiated second opinions.
conclusionsThis review identified several demographic factors associated with seeking a second opinion, including age, gender, health status, and socioeconomic status. Differences in opinion received, and in the impact of change in opinion, varies significantly between medical specialties. More research is needed to understand the cost effectiveness of second opinions and identify patient groups most likely to benefit from second opinions.
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.