Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37213723›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2022

Cancer clinical trial providers' perspectives on communicating goals of care: A key informant study.

Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Angela L Falisi, Kathleen Castro, Rebecca A Ferrer, Anna Gaysynsky, Grace C Huang, Michelle A Mollica, Emily B Peterson, Erin E Kent

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wen-Ying Sylvia ChouNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Angela L FalisiNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Kathleen CastroNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Rebecca A FerrerNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Anna GaysynskyNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Grace C HuangWestat, 1600 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Michelle A MollicaNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Emily B PetersonNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Erin E KentNational Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
National Cancer Institute · USWestat (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: There has been limited research to date exploring provider communication in the context of cancer clinical trials. To elucidate multidisciplinary care providers' experiences, this qualitative study sought to understand their perspectives and communication patterns around goals of care discussions with patients enrolled in cancer clinical trials. Methods: Semi-structured key informant interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, chaplains, nurses, and administrative staff in a cancer research hospital (N=19). Data were analyzed and interpreted using thematic analysis. Results: Providers hold varied perspectives on goals of care in cancer clinical trials, highlighting the tension and potential for misalignment between scientific and clinical (patient-centered) goals. Inherent institutional hierarchies may impede some team members from initiating goal discussions. Care transitions (e.g., stopping treatment or initiating hospice) offer critical opportunities for goals of care discussions. Conclusion: Conflicting perspectives among team members, perceptions of provider roles, and communication patterns could help explain some of the communication challenges previously documented in advanced cancer and clinical trial care. Innovation: This qualitative study contributes to the literature on healthcare team communication in the clinical trial context and highlights tangible opportunities to better leverage providers' diverse experience and improve patient-centered care.

Indexed as

Advanced cancercancer clinical trialshealth communicationoncology teamsqualitative methods

Identifiers

PMID37213723
PMCPMC10194320
OpenAlexW4224220203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.