SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Analysis of Influencing Factors and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Qualitative Studies.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A new paradigm for esophageal disease management: the application and future prospects of Shared Decision Making (SDM).World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Exploring transitions in care for individuals living with and beyond cancer: A qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Multidisciplinary collaborative enhanced recovery after surgery nursing in patients with colorectal cancer: A comparative study.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 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
backgroundOver the past 50 years, doctor-patient interactions have moved from paternalistic to patient-centered, emphasizing shared decision-making (SDM). SDM, which involves healthcare professionals and patients making clinical decisions together, is crucial for patient autonomy and is promoted worldwide, yet remains challenging to implement effectively. Our systematic review analyses the influencing factors of implementing shared decision-making in patients with colorectal cancer and summarizes coping strategies. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science (Core library), Ovid, and EBSCO databases was performed from database inception to 1 September 2024 using a combination of subject words and free words. Qualitative studies on the factors affecting SDM for patients with gastrointestinal cancer were identified, the literature quality was evaluated using the Australian JBI Evidence-based Health Care Center quality evaluation standards for qualitative research, and the results were integrated by a pooled integration method.
resultsA total of 37 results were extracted through meta-analysis, summarized into 9 themes, and summarized into 2 subthemes. The results were classified for nonmutually exclusive cases.
conclusionsMedical staff should fully understand patients' needs and preferences for disease and treatment information, strengthen their communication skills regarding SDM, and actively provide effective treatment and care information for patients and their families to promote the implementation of SDM for patients with gastrointestinal tumors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40238064What 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.