ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Ethical issues in communication in a tertiary oncology center: exploratory survey.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite evidence of its importance, communication in oncology remains a critical challenge, especially in case of bad news. The doctor-patient relationship is often strained by time limitations, emotional challenges, and cultural or ethical dilemmas surrounding end-of-life discussions. This study examines barriers to effective communication at the Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV), focusing on time constraints and emotional difficulties in clinical practice. It aims to identify factors hindering timely and effective discussions on bad news and end-of-life issues, the primary participants in such conversations, and reasons for delays in addressing sensitive topics. Materials and methods: An anonymous questionnaire was completed by 43 attending physicians from Oncology and Haemato-oncology departments at the IOV, with 69.8% of the respondents being women. The majority of the respondents were under 40 years of age. Data on demographics, roles, and communication practices were analysed to identify behavioral patterns. Results: Most respondents (65.1%) prioritized communicating bad news to patients rather than caregivers. Time constraints were the most reported barrier (40%), followed by emotional distress, fear of demotivating patients, and insufficient training. Despite challenges, 76.7% felt confident in shared decision-making with patients. Conclusion: The study highlights the need for structured communication training and better resources to address time and emotional barriers, to enhance patient autonomy and to reinforce doctor-patient relationships in end-of-life care.
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.