Observational studyOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2026
Needs Assessment for a Decision Aid in Oral Cancer Requiring Major Resection and Reconstructions.
Observational study in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTreatment of advanced oral cavity cancer necessitates ablative and reconstructive surgery that can be life-altering, creating nuanced priorities between the desire for survival and quality of life. This study sought to describe currents practice of shared decision-making among patients with advanced oral cavity cancer and determine the need for a decision support tool. STUDY
designCross-sectional, convergent, mixed methods study from 2020 to 2023.
settingTwo major Canadian academic centers.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted and interpreted via inductive thematic analysis of preoperative and postoperative patients with locoregionally advanced oral cavity cancer. Qualitative findings were integrated with data obtained from validated instruments that examined shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9), decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale; DCS), and decision-making self-efficacy (Ottawa Decision Self-Efficacy; ODSE).
resultsThe median age of the 37 participants was 67 years (SD: 11). Qualitative themes suggested that the following influenced care decisions: (1) approaches to information delivery, (2) preoperative experiences impact decision-making, (3) perceived knowledge gaps and negative emotions, and (4) fear of cancer. Seven patients (18.9%) had clinically significant decisional conflict (DCS > 25) despite high levels of decisional self-efficacy (mean ODSE 95.1, SD:7.9). Greater perception of shared decision-making (r = -0.328, P = .048) and decisional self-efficacy (r = -0.687, P < .001) were correlated with lower decisional conflict. Recommendations for future decision-making tools included: (1) wide accessibility, (2) timeline of treatment events, (3) incorporate components that activate shared decision-making and integrate the clinician-patient dyad, and (4) promote conversation around difficult topics.
conclusionThese findings support the need for integrated and improved tools to promote shared decision-making.
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.