Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38241601›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2024

Communication Strategies of Transplant Hematologists in High-Risk Decision-Making Conversations.

Rachel A Rodenbach, Thorunn Thordardottir, Markus Brauer, Aric C Hall, Earlise Ward, Cardinale B Smith, Toby C Campbell

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Improving cancer clinical trial enrollment and patient understanding using TrialTalk, a structured communication method: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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 1 country.

Rachel A RodenbachUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0001-5085-5347
Thorunn ThordardottirUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.
Markus BrauerUniversity of Wisconsin Department of Psychology, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0003-4395-2282
Aric C HallUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0002-6520-6056
Earlise WardUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.
Cardinale B SmithIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0003-3635-8701
Toby C CampbellUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0003-4910-1112
University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING IN HEMATOLOGYT32HL007899 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Jane Ellen Churpek · 1998 to 2026
$8.2M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007899
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeShared decision making (SDM) is essential to empower patients with blood cancers to make goal-concordant decisions about allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. This study characterizes communication strategies used by hematologists to discuss treatment options and facilitate SDM with patients in this high-risk, high-reward setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We recruited US hematologists who routinely perform allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant through email. Participants conducted up to an hour-long video-recorded encounter with an actor portraying a 67-year-old man with recently diagnosed high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. We transcribed and qualitatively analyzed video-recorded data.

resultsThe mean age of participants (N = 37) was 44 years, 65% male, and 68% White. Many hematologists included similar key points in this initial consultation, although varied in how much detail they provided. Their discussion of treatment options included transplant and chemotherapy and less commonly supportive care or clinical trials. They often emphasized transplant's potential for cure, discussed transplant chronologically from pretransplant considerations through the post-transplant course, and outlined risks, complications, and major outcomes. Hematologists referred to several elements that formed the basis of treatment decision making. The strength of their treatment recommendations ranged from strong recommendations for transplant or chemotherapy to deferrals pending more information. Hematologists also varied in the extent to which they indicated the decision was physician-driven, patient-led, or shared.

conclusionThe transplant decision-making discussion is complex. Identification of similar content areas used by hematologists can be used as the basis for a communication tool to help hematologists discuss allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant with patients.

Indexed as

CommunicationHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationAdultAgedDecision Making, SharedFemaleHematologic NeoplasmsHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID38241601
PMCPMC11590740
OpenAlexW4391015099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.