Literature DB >> 30579771

Communicating uncertainty in cancer prognosis: A review of web-based prognostic tools.

Mark Harrison1, Paul K J Han2, Borsika Rabin3, Madelaine Bell4, Hannah Kay5, Luke Spooner6, Stuart Peacock7, Nick Bansback8.   

Abstract

Objective To review how web-based prognosis tools for cancer patients and clinicians describe aleatory (risk estimates) and epistemic (imprecision in risk estimates) uncertainties. Methods We reviewed prognostic tools available online and extracted all uncertainty descriptions. We adapted an existing classification and classified each extracted statement by presentation of uncertainty. Results We reviewed 222 different prognostic risk tools, which produced 772 individual estimates. When describing aleatory uncertainty, almost all (90%) prognostic tools included a quantitative description, such as "chances of survival after surgery are 10%", though there was heterogeneity in the use of percentages, natural frequencies, and use of graphics. Only 14% of tools described epistemic uncertainty. Of those that did, most used a qualitative prefix such as "about" or "up to", while 22 tools described quantitative descriptions using confidence intervals or ranges. Conclusions Considerable heterogeneity exists in the way uncertainties are communicated in cancer prognostic tools. Few tools describe epistemic uncertainty. This variation is predominately explained by a lack of evidence and consensus in risk communication, particularly for epistemic uncertainty. Practice Implications As precision medicine seeks to improve prognostic estimates, the community may not be equipped with the tools to communicate the results accurately and effectively to clinicians and patients.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Communication; Prognosis; Survival; Uncertainty

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30579771      PMCID: PMC6491222          DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.12.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  22 in total

1.  Communication of uncertainty regarding individualized cancer risk estimates: effects and influential factors.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; William M P Klein; Tom Lehman; Bill Killam; Holly Massett; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 2.  Communicating prognosis in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  R G Hagerty; P N Butow; P M Ellis; S Dimitry; M H N Tattersall
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2005-06-06       Impact factor: 32.976

3.  Communicating breast cancer risks to women using different formats.

Authors:  I M Lipkus; W M Klein; B K Rimer
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 4.  A systematic review on communicating with patients about evidence.

Authors:  Lyndal J Trevena; Heather M Davey; Alexandra Barratt; Phyllis Butow; Patrina Caldwell
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.431

5.  Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Annette O'Connor; Dawn Stacey; Robert Volk; Adrian Edwards; Angela Coulter; Richard Thomson; Alexandra Barratt; Michael Barry; Steven Bernstein; Phyllis Butow; Aileen Clarke; Vikki Entwistle; Deb Feldman-Stewart; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Nora Moumjid; Al Mulley; Cornelia Ruland; Karen Sepucha; Alan Sykes; Tim Whelan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-08-14

6.  The greater ability of graphical versus numerical displays to increase risk avoidance involves a common mechanism.

Authors:  James A Schirillo; Eric R Stone
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.000

7.  Frequency or probability? A qualitative study of risk communication formats used in health care.

Authors:  M M Schapira; A B Nattinger; C A McHorney
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 8.  An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive tools.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Claus G Roehrborn; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Laypersons' responses to the communication of uncertainty regarding cancer risk estimates.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; William M P Klein; Thomas C Lehman; Holly Massett; Simon C Lee; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Conceptual problems in laypersons' understanding of individualized cancer risk: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Thomas C Lehman; Holly Massett; Simon J C Lee; William M P Klein; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.377

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Prognostic disclosure in oncology - current communication models: a scoping review.

Authors:  Julie Rachel Bloom; Deborah Catherine Marshall; Carlos Rodriguez-Russo; Emily Martin; Joshua Adam Jones; Kavita Vyas Dharmarajan
Journal:  BMJ Support Palliat Care       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 4.633

Review 2.  Great future or greedy venture: Precision medicine needs philosophy.

Authors:  Fei Jiao; Ruoyu Guo; Jacques S Beckmann; Zhonghai Yan; Yun Yang; Jinxia Hu; Xin Wang; Shuyang Xie
Journal:  Health Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-14

3.  Risk communication in a patient decision aid for radiotherapy in breast cancer: How to deal with uncertainty?

Authors:  D B Raphael; N S Russell; J M Immink; P G Westhoff; M C Stenfert Kroese; M R Stam; L M van Maurik; H J G D van den Bongard; J H Maduro; M G A Sattler; T van der Weijden; L J Boersma
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 4.380

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.