ArticleBMJ global health2025
Patient experience with cancer care in low- and middle-income Asian countries: a cross-sectional study of patients with advanced cancer.
Article in BMJ global health, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite the disproportionate burden of cancer morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), little is known about patients' care experiences in these settings. This study assesses which aspects of physician communication and care coordination most influence patients' overall experience with care, and factors associated with patient experience ratings, to inform quality improvement and improve cancer care experiences in LMICs.
methodsIn a cross-sectional study of 1933 patients with advanced cancer recruited at 10 major public hospitals in seven LMICs in Asia, patients rated their experience with physician communication, care coordination and overall.
resultsPhysician communication mattered most in patients' assessment of overall experience with care. Patient use of traditional medicine was associated with poorer physician communication ratings (β: -1.38, 95% CI: -2.11 to 0.65), while outpatient care (0.91, 95% CI: 0.24 to 1.57) was associated with higher ratings. Patients who were unsure (-0.77, 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.10) of their cancer stage (relative to aware of late-stage), or indicated financial difficulty (sufficient money to cover their daily needs fairly well (-0.77, 95% CI: -1.50 to -0.04) or poorly (-1.20, 95% CI: -2.30 to -0.09) relative to very well) rated care coordination lower. Patient experience ratings differed by minority group status and cancer severity understanding. Respondents identifying as ethnic minorities who were unsure of their cancer stage rated physician communication significantly higher (1.64, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.58) than non-minorities aware of their advanced cancer. Non-minorities unsure of their cancer stage rated care coordination significantly lower (-1.00, 95% CI: -1.64 to -0.36) than non-minority patients aware of their cancer stage.
conclusionsThis study provides new understanding of care priorities among patients with advanced cancer in LMICs. Our findings highlight the importance patients attribute to physician communication and considerations for improving patient-centred communication to support equitable and culturally appropriate care. This study also underscores the need for future work navigating prognostic discussions in LMICs.
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.