ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Examining cancer patient preferences during three stages of decision making and family involvement: a multicenter survey study in China.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative study exploring discharge readiness experiences among patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- The "good cancer" paradox: Decisional conflict and unmet support needs in patients with thyroid cancer facing surgical decisions-A mixed-methods study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Lessons from the field: culturally grounded approaches to recruiting Chinese American immigrant cancer patients to psycho-oncology trials.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Culturally Adapted Shared Decision-Making Tool for Breast Cancer Clinical Trials in China: A Nurse-Led Approach.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Development, Reliability, and Validity of the Treatment Decision-Making Needs Assessment Scale for Chinese Cancer Patients.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Health Information-Seeking Behavior in Older Adults with Vision Impairment Among Different Stages of Eye Care: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Shared Decision-Making Behavior in Surgery Among Early Breast Cancer Patients and Associated Factors Using COM-B Model: A Latent Profile Analysis.Journal of nursing management · 2025Article
- Exploring Patient Involvement in Treatment Decision-Making for Diabetic Retinopathy: A COM-B Model-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMedical decision-making is a complex multi-stage process. Chinese cancer patients' preference for participation in decision-making stages, family involvement and influencing factors remain unclear.
methodsA total of 1,422 cancer patients from four tertiary hospitals in China were included in the cross-sectional survey. Patient Expectation for Participation in Medical Decision-making Scale was used to measure patients' information, deliberation and decisional control preferences. The patient-family Control Preferences Scale was used to measure expected and actual levels of family involvement. Generalized estimation equation was performed to explore factors associated with patients' preferences.
results93.0% of patients had a high preference for information exchange, 95.8% for treatment deliberation, and 61.7% for decisional control. Equal participation was most common in family involvement in decision-making, followed by family-led and patient-led. 15.5% of patients reported a discrepancy between expected and actual family involvement. Age, education, marital status, number of adult children, occupation, family income, regular residence, health insurance and time since diagnosis were related to patient preference. Compared to patients with other cancer sites, those with breast [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95%CI: 1.47-2.77] and thyroid cancer [OR 2.37, 95%CI: 1.82-3.10] had higher information preference, those with breast [OR 2.98, 95%CI: 2.73-3.26] and esophagus cancer [OR 2.86, 95%CI: 1.13-7.22] had higher deliberation preference, and thyroid cancer patients [OR 1.50, 95%CI: 1.07-2.10] had higher decisional control preference. Patients who expected or experienced equal participation had higher preference at all stages of decision-making than those with family-led involvement. Patients with inconsistent expected and actual family involvement had lower preferences for the deliberation [OR 0.53, 95%CI: 0.36-0.77] and decisional control stages [OR 0.67, 95%CI: 0.56-0.79].
conclusionsChinese cancer patients generally have high preference for information exchange and treatment deliberation, but varied preferences for decision control, influenced by patients' sociodemographic factors, cancer types, time since diagnosis and family involvement. The findings underscore the importance of tailoring medical decision-making processes to individual patient preferences and ensuring family involvement aligns with patient expectations to enhance patient-centered care in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.