ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Barriers and Facilitators to Shared Decision-Making in EGFRm Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Patient Perspectives.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Global Lung Cancer Coalition Patient Charter highlights that every patient should have involvement in decision-making. In lung cancer, patient involvement in treatment decision-making is often perceived as difficult to achieve. Purpose: This study explored the experiences of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to identify the barriers and facilitators to their involvement in decision-making. Patients and Methods: An online Bulletin Board where participants answered quantitative and qualitative questions, interacting with an online moderator, was used to capture the experiences of 28 self-selected adult patients with EGFRm NSCLC recruited through a patient organisation. Results: 56% (15/27) of patients felt involved in their treatment decisions; they received sufficient information from their doctor and were able to ask the questions they needed. Information most important in supporting treatment decision involvement was: treatment effectiveness; impact on prognosis; mechanism of action; impact of treatment on daily life; treatment administration; possible side effects and their management. 37% (10/27) of patients did not feel involved in their treatment decisions. Half (5/10) were not asked about their treatment preferences. Patients who did not feel involved reported a lack of understanding about EGFR, confusion over medical terms that led to misunderstandings, and no personalisation of treatment information. 43% (12/28) of patients reported that their doctors used visual aids (CT scans, hand drawing/annotating diagrams and charts). When used, these enhanced patients' understanding and involvement. Most patients (96%, 27/28) wanted to understand treatment effectiveness; progression free survival, overall survival, overall response rate but struggled to understand the medical terminology. Conclusion: These findings from a small, self-selected group of patients highlight the importance of clear information, personalised and tailored to individual patients, in enabling patients with EGFRm NSCLC to be involved in their treatment decisions. Validation in a broader patient population would be valuable.
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.