Communication between patients and providers and informed decision making

Journal of the National Cancer Institute - Monographs

Volumn , Issue 41, 2010, Pages 204-209

  Elmore, Joann G ^a   Ganschow, Pamela S ^b   Geller, Berta M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b RUSH MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TAMOXIFEN;

ANXIETY; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MASS MEDIUM; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VERBAL COMMUNICATION; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BREAST TUMOR; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HUMAN RELATION; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MASTECTOMY; PATIENT; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PROGNOSIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNCERTAINTY; UTILIZATION REVIEW; VIDEORECORDING;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MASS MEDIA; MASTECTOMY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENTS; PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONS; PROGNOSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRUTH DISCLOSURE; UNCERTAINTY; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 79952197342     PISSN: 10526773     EISSN: 17456614     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgq038     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan EC, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer. 2004;101:(5 suppl):1214-1228.
2. O'Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;8(3):CD001431.
3. The Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making (FIMDM). Problems With Medical Decision Making-Ethical Concerns; 2010. http://www.informedmedicaldecisions.org/problems_with_medical_decision _making.html. Accessed January 6, 2010.
4. Allegra CJ, Aberle DR, Ganschow P, et al. NIH state-of-the-science conference statement: diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2009;26(2):1-27.
5. Black WC, Nease RF Jr, Tosteson AN. Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87(10):720-731.
6. Partridge A, Adloff K, Blood E, et al. Risk perceptions and psychosocial outcomes of women with ductal carcinoma in situ: longitudinal results from a cohort study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(4):243-251.
7. Welch HG, Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. The sea of uncertainty surrounding ductal carcinoma in situ-the price of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(4):228-229.
8. Welch HG. Should I Be Tested for Cancer? Maybe Not and Here's Why. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2004.
9. Bluman LG, Borstelmann NA, Rimer BK, Iglehart JD, Winer EP. Knowledge, satisfaction, and perceived cancer risk among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2001;10(6):589-598.
10. Rakovitch E, Franssen E, Kim J, et al. A comparison of risk perception and psychological morbidity in women with ductal carcinoma in situ and early invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003;77(3):285-293.
11. van Gestel YR, Voogd AC, Vingerhoets AJ, et al. A comparison of quality of life, disease impact and risk perception in women with invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(3):549-556.
12. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. Cure me even if it kills me: preferences for invasive cancer treatment. Med Decis Making. 2005;25(6):614-619.
13. Tuttle TM, Jarosek S, Habermann EB, et al. Increasing rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(9):1362-1367.
14. Burke W, Olsen AH, Pinsky LE, Reynolds SE, Press NA. Misleading presentation of breast cancer in popular magazines. Eff Clin Pract. 2001;4(2):58-64.
15. Lerner BH. The Breast Cancer Wars: Hope, Fear, and the Pursuit of a Cure in Twentieth-Century America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2001.
16. Lemal M, Van den Bulck J. Television news exposure is related to fear of breast cancer. Prev Med. 2009;48(2):189-192.
17. Nattinger AB, Hoffmann RG, Howell-Pelz A, Goodwin JS. Effect of Nancy Reagan's mastectomy on choice of surgery for breast cancer by US women. JAMA. 1998;279(10):762-766.
18. Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(1):37-44.
19. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. [see comment]. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966-972.
20. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Risk communication in clinical practice: putting cancer in context. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25:124-133.
21. Egger JR, Cutter GR, Carney PA, et al. Mammographers' perception of women's breast cancer risk. Med Decis Making. 2005;25(3):283-289.
22. The Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making (FIMDM). Informing and Involving Patients in Medical Decisions: The Primary Care Physicians Perspective. www.informedmedicaldecisions.org/pdfs/FinalwhitepaperPCPSurvey.pdf. Accessed January 12, 2010.
23. Wennberg JE, Cooper MM, Bubolz TA, et al. The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care in the United States.Chicago, IL: American Hospital Publishing; 1996.
24. Bruera E, Willey JS, Palmer JL, Rosales M. Treatment decisions for breast carcinoma: patient preferences and physician perceptions. Cancer. 2002;94(7):2076-2080.
25. Elwyn G, O'Connor A, Stacey D, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006;333(7565):417.
26. Kerlikowske K, Molinaro AM, Gauthier ML, et al. Biomarker expression and risk of subsequent tumors after initial ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(9):627-637.
27. Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Shamliyan T, Kane RL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review of incidence, treatment, and outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(3):170-178.
28. Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, et al. Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2004;292(4):435-441.
29. Schapira MM, Nattinger AB, McHorney CA. Frequency or probability? A qualitative study of risk communication formats used in health care. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(6):459-467.
30. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. The risk of death by age, sex, and smoking status in the United States: putting health risks in context. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(12):845-853.
31. Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(5):696-713.
32. Edwards A, Gray J, Clarke A, et al. Interventions to improve risk communication in clinical genetics: systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;71(1):4-25.
33. O'Connor A, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Stacey D. International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration Background Document. http://ipdas.ohri.ca/IPDAS_background.pdf, 2005. Accessed January 14, 2010.
34. Ancker JS, Senathirajah Y, Kukafka R, Starren JB. Design features of graphs in health risk communication: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13(6):608-618.
35. Lipkus IM, Hollands JG. The visual communication of risk. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25):149-163.
36. Peters E, Hibbard J, Slovic P, Dieckmann N. Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26(3):741-748.
37. Trevena LJ, Davey HM, Barratt A, Butow P, Caldwell P. A systematic review on communicating with patients about evidence. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12(1):13-23.
38. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) eight-year update of Protocol B-17: intraductal carcinoma. Cancer. 1999;86(3):429-438.
39. Gigerenzer G. Calculated Risks: How to Know When Numbers Deceive You. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster; 2002.
40. Boyages J, Delaney G, Taylor R. Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. Cancer. 1999;85(3):616-628.
41. Fisher B, Land S, Mamounas E, Dignam J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(4):400-418.
42. Jorgensen KJ, Brodersen J, Hartling OJ, Nielsen M, Gotzsche PC. Informed choice requires information about both benefits and harms. J Med Ethics. Apr 2009;35(4):268-269.
43. Zapka JG, Geller BM, Bulliard JL, Fracheboud J, Sancho-Garnier H, Ballard-Barbash R. Print information to inform decisions about mammography screening participation in 16 countries with population-based programs. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;63(1-2):126-137.
44. Geller BM, Zapka J, Hofvind SS, et al. Communicating with women about mammography. J Cancer Educ. 2007;22(1):25-31.
45. Li CI, Malone KE, Saltzman BS, Daling JR. Risk of invasive breast carcinoma among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ and lobular carcinoma in situ, 1988-2001. Cancer. 2006;106(10):2104-2112.
46. Epstein RM, Alper BS, Quill TE. Communicating evidence for participatory decision making. JAMA. 2004;291(19):2359-2366.