ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2025
Effectiveness of question prompt list interventions for patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 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.
- Trial
- Bridging the difficult talk: dentists' perception of a patient-centred communication aid to improve oral cancer early detection.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Application of digital health interventions in the management of economic toxicity in cancer patients: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
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
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of question prompt list (QPL) interventions in patients with cancer and to synthesize the delivery characteristics of such interventions. Methods: A systematic search of five electronic databases was conducted for English-language randomized controlled trials published up to January 2025. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Eligible studies included cancer patients aged 16 years or older, with QPLs used in the intervention group to facilitate patient-physician communication. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was used to assess study quality, and meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: A total of 302 records were identified, of which 14 studies (reported in 16 articles) met the inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorized into two groups: QPLs with instructions and QPLs without instructions. Pooled meta-analysis demonstrated that QPL interventions significantly enhanced patient engagement in shared decision-making, increased the number of questions asked, and improved the perceived helpfulness of the material. Compared to QPL alone, QPL with instructions further increased the number of patient-initiated questions and improved decision self-efficacy. Conclusions: QPL interventions with accompanying instructions showed superior effectiveness in promoting patient question-asking behavior and enhancing decision self-efficacy. This review underscores the potential of QPLs-particularly those with instructions-to improve patient-physician communication. Further research is warranted to refine these interventions and explore their role in reducing patient anxiety. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD42024594145.
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.