ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Patient, Care Partner, and Physician Voices in Treatment Decision-Making for Multiple Myeloma.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Current Role of Physiotherapy in Systemic Light-Chain (AL) Amyloidosis and Multiple Myeloma.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Awareness and Utilization of the Revised Second International Staging System (R2-ISS) and 1q21 Gain/Amplification Testing: A Nationwide Web-Based Survey of Hematologists in Japan.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Patients', clinicians' and research's priorities on important outcomes in multiple myeloma: A mixed-methods study.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making in Treatment Selection in Multiple Myeloma in Spain: The PRISMMA Study.European journal of haematology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Treatment decision-making for multiple myeloma (MM) is complex. Individuals involved in decision-making may value treatment attributes differently based on their role as a patient, care partner, or physician. This study describes those attributes, and what is most important by role. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with consenting adult patients with MM, MM care partners, and physicians treating MM. Respondents were recruited from US panels (Inspire and M3 Global Research) between September and December 2022. Survey items were informed by a targeted literature review, qualitative interviews, and a steering committee comprising clinical experts, a patient advocate, patient, and care partner. Descriptive statistics were generated and reported in aggregate. Results: Email invitations were sent to 8071 Inspire members interested in or posting about MM. Of these, 4427 viewed the invitation, 941 responded, and 156 patients and care partners completed the survey (17% of respondents). For physicians, 5588 were invited via Email by M3 Global Research, with 761 viewing the invitation, 214 accessing the survey link, and 137 completing the survey (64% of respondents). Duration of response, side effects, and patients' quality-of-life (QoL) were the top three treatment attributes selected across the three cohorts; alignment of these attributes was consistent among patients regardless of disease severity. Separately, patients rated QoL and the amount of caregiving needed during/after treatment as the most important factors for future treatment decisions. If more effective MM treatments were offered, care partners were more willing to assume greater family burden (77%) compared to patients (49%), and patients were more accepting of potential serious side effects (50%) than were care partners (34%). Conclusion: Patients with MM, care partners, and physicians consider and value various treatment decision-making factors. Recognizing and addressing these differences is critical to meeting patients' preferences, needs, and optimizing patient outcomes.
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.