ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026
Perceptions of the Values and Outcomes to Improve Cancer Experiences (VOICE) tool: a digital values-clarification instrument and tailored summary report for older adults with advanced cancer.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2026. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOlder adults represent the majority of patients with advanced cancer, yet this group frequently reports a lack of discussion of their values as part of treatment decision-making. We previously developed a values-clarification tool called Values and Outcomes to Improve Cancer Experiences (VOICE) that uses best-worst scaling methods to prioritize treatment values and generates a tailored summary report to support patients in talking with their oncologist during treatment decisions. VOICE assesses 7 treatment values: doing activities that are meaningful; managing medical expenses; maintaining independence; minimizing side effects; reducing time spent receiving care; accessing resources for understanding treatment plans; and living longer. The objective of this study was to evaluate older adults’ perceptions of VOICE for comprehensibility and acceptability.
methodsWe used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study to assess perceptions of VOICE with qualitative (think-aloud protocols and semi-structured interviews) and quantitative (questionnaires) data. Interview questions focused on how older adults may perceive VOICE to affect or prepare them for values-based communication and decision-making with their oncologist. Interviews were coded thematically by three coders, and questionnaires were summarized descriptively.
resultsFifteen older adults (ages 62–88; 60% female; 60% Caucasian, 27% Black, 13% other) with advanced cancer participated. Participants understood the treatment values as presented in VOICE, and anticipated VOICE having a positive influence on their self-efficacy, confidence, motivation, and likelihood to discuss values with oncologists. Descriptive findings showed that 74% (n = 11/15) felt more prepared for meaningful discussions with their oncologist about long-term health status and treatment plans. Participants also perceived that VOICE was helpful in preparing them for discussions with oncologists by helping them to advocate for themselves (n = 10/15), self-reflect on what is important when making treatment decisions (n = 10/15) and reduce their anxiety (n = 3/15). Five interview themes were identified: (i) balancing treatment and everyday life, (ii) patient involvement and value assessment, (iii) emotional and psychological impact of diagnosis and treatment, (iv) communication and relationships, and (v) processing and seeking information.
conclusionOlder adults with advanced cancer perceived the VOICE values clarification tool to be comprehensible, relevant, acceptable, and useful for improving communication with their oncologist. Further evidence is needed to better understand how patients and oncologists engage in values-clarification processes, and whether implementing tools into clinical practice helps align patient values with treatment recommendations.
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.