ArticleScientific reports2026
Risk attitudes and value of hope: survey results from Japanese hematologists and oncologists treating patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Willingness to Pay for Treatment Attributes in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- Japanese hematologists' and oncologists' perceptions of patient preferences for shared decision-making.BMC research notes · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The "value of hope" refers to treatments that offer a small probability of cure without necessarily improving average survival. While this concept has gained attention in the academic literature, little is known about how physicians perceive and integrate it into clinical decision-making. This study explored the treatment preferences of Japanese hematologists and oncologists in managing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with a focus on factors influencing the choice between riskier and more predictable options. An online survey was distributed to 231 physicians, using hypothetical patient vignettes that varied by age, ECOG performance status, and likelihood of long-term remission. For each scenario, respondents chose between a treatment with a certain but limited survival outcome and a riskier "hopeful" treatment offering the same expected survival but a chance of longer remission. Physician demographics, experience, and institutional factors were also collected. Across scenarios, 29-40% of physicians selected the hopeful treatment. The likelihood of choosing this option decreased when certain survival was longer (6 vs. 3 months). Younger physicians and those working in larger or university hospitals were significantly more likely to favor hopeful treatments, as were those in institutions meeting CAR-T use guideline criteria. These findings suggest that physicians, like patients, may place value on treatments offering even small chances of extended survival.
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.