Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39833595›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2025

The Implementation of Decision Aids During Medical Consultations for Lung Cancer Patients: A Focus Group Within I3LUNG Project.

Valeria Sebri, Patrizia Dorangricchia, Dario Monzani, Chiara Marzorati, Roberto Grasso, Lorenzo Conti, Giuseppe Lo Russo, Leonardo Provenzano, Andra Diana Dumitrascu, Gabriella Pravettoni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors.

Valeria SebriApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. valeria.sebri@ieo.it.ORCID 0000-0002-1227-7336
Patrizia DorangricchiaApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.
Dario MonzaniApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.
Chiara MarzoratiApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.
Roberto GrassoApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.
Lorenzo ContiApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe Lo RussoThoracic Oncology Unit, Medical Oncology Department 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Leonardo ProvenzanoMedical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Andra Diana DumitrascuThoracic Oncology Unit, Medical Oncology Department 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Gabriella PravettoniApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung cancer patients generally receive several information regarding their illness characteristics and available intervention. Therefore, patients can experience confusion, leading to anxiety and distress that might damage the relationship with physicians and treatment adherence. Literature showed that implementing decision aid tools during consultation can promote patients' knowledge and awareness about lung cancer and available oncological intervention, improving a shared decision-making process. However, not all lung cancer patients always appreciate decision aids' implementation. The present qualitative study explored patients' opinions and preferences regarding the implementation of decision aids during medical consultation. Twenty-two lung cancer patients who have already attended medical consultations for lung cancer voluntarily participated in four online focus groups carried out between January 2023 and December 2024. A thematic analysis with a bottom-up approach highlighted three main themes: the typology and number of information that patients would have received, the relevance of patient-and-doctor relationship, and the effects of providing additional decision-making tools on patients' emotions and preferences. Findings showed controversial opinions among patients, highlighting the relevance of personalized intervention tailored to patients' preferences. Practical implications are given.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesLung NeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPhysician-Patient RelationsReferral and ConsultationAdultAgedDecision MakingFemaleFocus GroupsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchDecision aidsDoctor-patient relationshipFocus groupLung cancer patientsShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID39833595
PMCPMC12504329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.