ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2025
A New Approach to Cancer Second Opinions: Overcoming the Challenges of Conventional Oncology Practice by Providing Education to Patients and Physicians.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Second opinions for cancer diagnosis are frequently sought although they are of variable value to the patient and their primary oncologist. The oncology opinion service launched in 2020 without barriers frequently associated with conventional health systems. Financial barriers were removed; neither patient nor insurance was billed. The service is free of charge. Consult-only service provision, without providing therapy, allows objectivity and minimizes competition between oncology practices. Rapid communication with the treating oncologists allows for consensus treatment planning. Surveys were sent to patients and primary treating physicians assessing the value of the service and to assess the patient's experience. Between 1/2020 and 12/2023, surveys were sent to patients and their physicians. 539/1244 patients and 186/1319 physicians returned the completed survey. Surveys were scored from 1 to 5 with 5 being the best. Patient surveys rated "perceived value" at 4.95. Physicians scored "helpfulness" at 4.84. Physicians scored 4.07 for the question "enhances your relationship with patient." This model of providing second opinions offers valuable services to patients and their treating physicians without adding additional financial burden or disturbing their care process.
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.