Observational studyJournal of pain and symptom management2026
Feasibility and Acceptability of Symptom Management Research in Black Advanced Lung Cancer Patients.
Observational study in Journal of pain and symptom management, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextPatients from historically marginalized racial and ethnic groups are often underrepresented in symptom management research, but little is known about how to improve inclusivity and reach of these studies.
objectivesThis mixed-methods study aimed to: 1) establish the feasibility and acceptability of study procedures for assessing symptoms and shared decision-making (SDM) among Black patients with advanced lung cancer; and 2) elicit participants' suggestions for improving study procedures.
methodsBlack patients with advanced lung cancer were recruited from three thoracic oncology clinics. Participants completed a baseline survey (T0), optional audio-recording of a routine oncology outpatient appointment, follow-up surveys one week (T1) and one month (T2) postappointment, and a semistructured exit interview examining experiences in the study and suggestions for improving future research. At each timepoint, participants completed the Treatment Acceptability and Preferences Questionnaire (TAPQ).
resultsWe approached 69 potentially eligible patients, 40 (58%) completed the eligibility screener, 35 (88%) were eligible, 30 (86%) consented, and 27 (90%) were retained through T2, exceeding our a priori thresholds of ≥70% enrollment and retention through T2. Participants rated study procedures as acceptable (TAPQ scores ≥3) in 88% of observations, exceeding our a priori threshold of ≥70%. Qualitative analysis identified three categories of themes: participants' motivation for participating, their overall experiences in the study, and recommendations for future research.
conclusionResearch practices common in communication, palliative, and SDM studies were acceptable to most participants. Opportunities to improve were also identified. Findings can inform best practices in conducting inclusive palliative care and communication research.
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.