ArticleAmerican journal of surgery2025
"So, what are you saying?": A qualitative study of surgeon-patient communication in the rectal cancer consultations.
Article in American journal of surgery, 2025. 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring Communication Dynamics Between Patients and Healthcare Providers in Oncology: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Conversations in rectal cancer treatment: a qualitative study of multidisciplinary clinician perspective into non-operative management decision-making discussions.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Bridging the communication gap in foregut cancer: A qualitative exploration of patient and caregiver perspectives.Surgical oncology insight · 2026Article
- Mitigating uncertainty and improving nursing quality: information needs for patients and their families regarding intensive care unit (ICU) tours for lung cancer surgery.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPatients with rectal cancer face a potentially life-limiting disease with multi-modal treatment options conferring substantial symptom burdens. Treatment decisions frequently require trade-offs and input from a multidisciplinary team: ideal cases for shared decision-making. Using qualitative analysis, we characterized the content of communication between surgeons and patients who have rectal cancer.
methodsWe performed secondary analysis of audio-recorded clinic visits of patients with rectal cancer (n = 18) with colorectal surgeons (n = 8) at 5 academic centers. Four coders used inductive content analysis with an analytical emphasis on communication about decision-making.
resultsSurgeons focused on communicating technical details of potential treatment pathways. Patients sought information around prognosis, functional changes, long-term recovery, and next steps. Surgeons laid groundwork for shared decision-making; patient goals were not routinely clarified. Decisions were typically deferred due to uncertainty and missing information needed to determine appropriate treatment options.
conclusionsOur findings suggest avenues for surgeons to enhance communication around rectal cancer decision-making: acknowledging uncertainty and providing concrete information when able, focusing on topics such as prognosis, tradeoffs, and long-term recovery, and clarifying patient preferences.
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.