ArticlePalliative medicine2023
How patients with advanced cancer conceptualize prognosis: A phenomenological qualitative inquiry.
Article in Palliative medicine, 2023. 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.
- Association between family-perceived quality of death and dying, prognostic awareness, and end-of-life discussions in five common diseases: a nationwide mortality follow-back study.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- 'I couldn't live without hope': A qualitative study using reflexive thematic analysis on approaches to hope and prognostic awareness among people with advanced disease.Palliative medicine · 2025Article
- Global perspectives on patient-centered outcomes: advancing patient-centered cancer clinical trials globally.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2025Article
- Facilitating patient-oncologist communication in advanced treatment-resistant cancer: development and feasibility testing of a question prompt list.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- The trajectory of prognostic cognition in patients with advanced cancer: is the traditional advance care planning approach desirable for patients?Japanese journal of clinical 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the importance of accurate prognostic understanding in patients with advanced cancer, there is little consensus around how to conceptualize and measure the multidimensional construct. Most studies focus on single aspects of prognostic understanding (e.g., curability) that clinicians have identified as important; no previous research has asked patients how they define "prognosis."
aimThe present study examined how patients with advanced cancer conceptualize their "prognosis." It also explored how patients assigned value to prognostic information and the impact of prognosis on life perspectives.
designA phenomenological approach was used to analyze semi-structured interviews with individuals with advanced cancer to examine how patients define prognosis. SETTING/
participantsEnglish and Spanish-speaking patients with advanced cancer (
resultsTo conceptualize prognosis, patients focused on concrete medical data, anticipated survival and quality of life, impact on meaningful life events, uncertainty, and physician affect. They discussed the importance of maintaining normalcy despite prognosis, knowledge as a form of coping, information reframing, and altered decision-making as means of coping with prognostic information.
conclusionsGiven the range of ways patients define prognosis and assign value to prognostic information, clinicians should incorporate a thorough assessment of patient information preferences, values, and coping styles when engaging in end-of-life discussions. Trainings should emphasize the importance of nonverbal cues (i.e., affect management, body language) in prognostic disclosure.
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.