ArticleCancers2024
Differences in the Communication of Cancer Diagnoses by Different Health Professionals and the Impact of Oncologist Communication on Patients' Emotions.
Article in Cancers, 2024. 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.
- Learning through difficult disclosures of cancer progression: experiences of physicians and nurses in training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Healthcare Professionals Describe Difficulties Encountered When Breaking Bad News to Oncology Patients: An Italian Observational Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- The Practices of Portuguese Primary Health Care Professionals in Palliative Care Access and Referral: A Focus Group Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Timing and Method of Patient-Provider Communication for Abnormal Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Results in Cirrhosis.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- From Broad Theoretic Postulating to Precision Communication - A Contemporary Narrative Review of Cancer Communication.Indian journal of palliative careReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The field of healthcare is increasingly adopting a humanistic perspective in the physician-patient relationship. One of the more salient aspects being studied is the communication between the two. This study serves a dual purpose. Our initial aim was to study how a cancer diagnosis is disclosed to patients by different physicians (GPs/other specialists/oncologists). Secondly, we set out to study how the way in which oncologists normally communicate with their patients impacts variables such as a patient's anxiety, depression, coping mechanisms, and perception of both their health and their quality of life. A total of 177 patients answered a battery of questionnaires on sociodemographic and disease data: the SPIKES protocol, the EORTCQLQ-COMU26, and the ADAF screening questionnaire. The analyses recorded medium or high scores for some of the steps in the SPIKES protocol when delivering the diagnosis, and significant differences were observed for some of them among different physicians. The level of a cancer patient's satisfaction with the communication by oncologists was related to their levels of anxiety, depression, vulnerability, and perception of their health and quality of life. Better communication strategies are called for among all healthcare professionals to facilitate the task of breaking bad news to their patients.
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.