ArticleThe oncologist2025
Choice of oncologist and influencing factors: analysis of the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network registry.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Building Trust in a Newly Established Physician-Patient Relationship: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Choice of oncologist by patients with pancreatic cancer is a complex personal decision. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network registry to explore whether age, gender, disease status, feelings of trust and comfort, and the opportunity for clinical trial participation influenced patient choice. Of 110 participants who completed the "Information about Choosing an Oncologist Survey," 68 (61.8%) reported visiting another oncologist. Feeling comfortable and trusting their first oncologist decreased the likelihood of seeking a second opinion (OR: 0.08; CI: 0.01-0.42; P = .005). Patients with resectable disease were also less likely to visit another oncologist compared to patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced disease (OR: 0.28; CI: 0.08-0.95; P = .042). Age, gender, and the opportunity for clinical trial participation did not influence patient choice. Most patients who saw additional oncologists did so because of recommendations from friends or family members. This analysis leveraged patient-reported outcomes to highlight determinants of patient decision-making.
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.