ArticleESMO real world data and digital oncology2026
An individualized patient decision-making tool to improve decision making in non-small cell lung cancer: a mixed methods approach.
Article in ESMO real world data and digital oncology, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are asked to make decisions during their cancer journey, with a relevant impact on their quality of life, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes. Improving shared decision-making can be complex, thereby damaging patient-doctor communication. Materials and methods: We followed three developmental phases, conducting focus groups, semistructured interviews, thinking-out-loud sessions, and a questionnaire with patients and semistructured interviews with physicians. Interviews were audio-recorded, verbatim transcribed, thematically coded, and analyzed. Phase I consisted of an evaluation of decisional needs during medical consultations; phase II tested the comprehensibility and usability of the first, static individualized patient decision aid (PDA); and phase III beta-tested the feasibility of the second, dynamic PDA. Results: Patients with NSCLC and oncologists agreed on the need to develop a tailored PDA to promote shared decision-making. Over the three phases, findings highlight that PDA can be a helpful decision tool to (i) provide clear and appropriate information to promote patients' knowledge and awareness, improving emotion regulation; (ii) assess patients' preferences and values, considering also if there is information that a patient do not desire to receive (i.e. survivorship rates); (iii) have a trustworthy relationship with the physicians; and (iv) involve caregivers in the process of care efficiently. Conclusion: An online PDA for patients with NSCLC is proved to be a helpful tool for shared decision making, supporting clinical practice, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes. A clinical trial will be started with newly diagnosed patients with NSCLC and their oncologists, involving the latest, dynamic version of PDA.
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.