ArticleInternational journal of nursing sciences2026
Prognostic communication preferences of cancer patients: A hybrid concept analysis.
Article in International journal of nursing sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to analyze a comprehensive concept of prognostic communication preferences among cancer patients, focusing on their attributes, antecedents, and consequences. Methods: A hybrid concept analysis was employed. In the theoretical phase, a literature review across 10 databases (e.g., PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library) was conducted. The fieldwork phase included semi-structured interviews with six cancer patients recruited from oncology departments of a general hospital in southern China between May and July 2024. In the final analytic phase, findings from the above two phases were synthesized to develop a comprehensive understanding of the concept. Results: Twenty-four studies were included. The study identified key attributes of prognostic communication preferences, including communication modality, information characteristics, and external support. Antecedents included personal characteristics, the medical context, and professional factors. The consequences of aligned communication included enhanced patient satisfaction, psychological well-being, and decision-making quality. Conclusions: This research provides a comprehensive definition of prognostic communication preferences of cancer patients. The findings offer insights to guide clinicians and nurses in tailoring prognostic communication to better meet patients' unique preferences across multiple levels, supporting patient-centered care and 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.