Evidence mapPaperPMID 41553107Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2026

Surrogate Decision-Making by Family Caregivers for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer: Qualitative Study in a High-Volume Chinese Center.

Zheng-Ke-Ke Tan, Dan-Ni Li, Kui Jia, Wen-Zhen Tang, Xin Chen, Li Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zheng-Ke-Ke TanNursing Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6409-8077
Dan-Ni LiNursing Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4413-4303
Kui JiaGastrointestinal Surgery Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3512-9050
Wen-Zhen TangNursing Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9159-9538
Xin ChenNursing Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4686-8821
Li YangNursing Department, First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8604-9541

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been integrated into the management of gastric cancer (GC) as a combined approach for addressing peritoneal metastasis, serving both prophylactic and therapeutic roles following GC surgery. The pivotal decision regarding HIPEC administration typically arises intraoperatively, creating a complex clinical scenario where family caregivers must act as surrogate decision-makers under substantial time constraints. This decision-making process proves particularly challenging due to limited understanding of the procedure's risk-benefit profile and long-term outcomes among nonmedical surrogates, challenges often exacerbated by the acute stress of the surgical environment.

objectiveThis qualitative study aims to explore how family caregivers of patients with GC navigate the HIPEC decision-making process, specifically examining the facilitators, challenges, and the role of information acquisition that shape the shared decision-making mode.

methodsThis study adopted a qualitative approach using semistructured interviews; 15 family caregivers of patients with GC in a major tertiary hospital in Guangxi Province were selected as research objects through a purposive sampling method. Participants were asked to comment on their experience of surrogate decision-making for the HIPEC process. The Colaizzi 7-step method was used to analyze and summarize the themes.

resultsThe mean age of the 15 participants was 39.8 (SD 13.29, range 20-68) years, and all patients were on average aged 56.7 (SD 10.78, range 36-74) years. The relationship to the patient was distributed as follows: 33% (5/15) spouses, 60% (9/15) children, and 6% (1/15) other relatives. Four major themes emerged from the data analysis: (1) shared decision-making participation mode (doctor-led passive decision-making and doctor-family shared decision-making); (2) decision-information sources (decision-making information came from medical-care personnel, decision-making information came from the internet, and decision-making information came from acquaintances); (3) challenges in the decision-making process (financial burden and anticipated therapeutic efficacy); and (4) facilitator in the decision-making process (positive health beliefs and cultural dimensions of perceived responsibility: a Confucian perspective).

conclusionsHIPEC decision-making by family caregivers of patients with GC was primarily passive decision-making, and many obstacles and facilitators were encountered in the process. Medical staff should share information and encourage and guide family caregivers to participate in the decision-making process through decision assistance or decision support.

Indexed as

CaregiversDecision MakingHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyPeritoneal NeoplasmsStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedChinaEast Asian PeopleFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchfamily caregiversgastric cancerhyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapyqualitative studysurrogate decision-making

Identifiers

PMID41553107
PMCPMC12865350

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.