IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v27y1988i11p1139-1145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information and decision-making preferences of hospitalized adult cancer patients

Author

Listed:
  • Blanchard, Christina G.
  • Labrecque, Mark S.
  • Ruckdeschel, John C.
  • Blanchard, Edward B.

Abstract

Physician behaviors and patient responses were studied in 439 interactions between hospitalized adult cancer patients and oncologists to investigate patient preferences for a participatory role in the interaction. Patients were asked their preference for information to be given (minimal; only if it is good news; or all information, good or bad) and their preference for participation in decision-making (prefer doctor makes therapeutic decisions or prefer to participate in decisions). The majority (92%) preferred all information be given, but only 69% preferred to participate in therapeutic decisions. Of those wanting all the information, 24.9% preferred the physician to make the therapeutic decisions. This group was comprised primarily of older, sicker males. Those who did not want to participate were also slightly more satisfied (P

Suggested Citation

  • Blanchard, Christina G. & Labrecque, Mark S. & Ruckdeschel, John C. & Blanchard, Edward B., 1988. "Information and decision-making preferences of hospitalized adult cancer patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 27(11), pages 1139-1145, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:11:p:1139-1145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(88)90343-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaston, Christine M. & Mitchell, Geoffrey, 2005. "Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(10), pages 2252-2264, November.
    2. Lim, Jennifer N.W. & Edlin, Richard, 2009. "Preferences of older patients and choice of treatment location in the UK: A binary choice experiment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 252-257, August.
    3. Schaepe, Karen Sue, 2011. "Bad news and first impressions: Patient and family caregiver accounts of learning the cancer diagnosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(6), pages 912-921, September.
    4. Aakrati Mathur & E. Robert Orellana & Amy Frohnmayer & Pauline Jivanjee & Lillian Nail & Brandon Hayes-Lattin & Rebecca G. Block, 2013. "Patients’ Perception of Patient–Provider Communication in Fertility Preservation Decision Making Among Young Women With Cancer," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440135, September.
    5. Moumjid, Nora & Charles, Cathy & Morelle, Magali & Gafni, Amiram & Brémond, Alain & Farsi, Fadila & Whelan, Tim & Carrère, Marie-Odile, 2009. "The statutory duty of physicians to inform patients versus unmet patients' information needs: The case of breast cancer in France," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 162-173, July.
    6. Michael Saheb Kashaf & Elizabeth McGill, 2015. "Does Shared Decision Making in Cancer Treatment Improve Quality of Life? A Systematic Literature Review," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(8), pages 1037-1048, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    doctor-cancer patient relationship;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:11:p:1139-1145. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.