Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Johnson, M.; Tod, A.M.; Brummell, S.; Collins, K. (2015)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article

Purpose - For patients with cancer, providing appropriate information about prognosis or chances of recurrent disease remains a difficult area of practice. Much research has suggested that patients want to be given all available information, although the realities of attempting to do this are complex and may be perceived by some as uncaring. A review of recent literature was undertaken to explore the process of disclosure, patient experience and preferences for information regarding prognosis or risk of recurrence.


Methods - A systematic approach was taken to searching electronic databases for relevant literature from 2004 to June 2014. Primary research from a range of methodological approaches was included and critical interpretive synthesis was employed to explore themes and identify gaps in the evidence.


Results - Twenty papers were identified as appropriate. They were diverse in objectives and patient groups. Themes identified included: the nature of prognostic information, patient need for prognostic information, patient need to maintain hope, balancing hope and realism, patient factors, disease factors and clinician factors. A thematic framework was developed.


Conclusions - Patients often struggle to fully understand complex prognostic information. They value help in making sense of this information and generally want information that supports hope. Working with patients to understand and manage the uncertainty of their situation may be particularly valuable. Further research is needed to fully understand the process of prognostic information giving and what information patients want regarding recurrence risk. Research should be aimed at identifying strategies helpful to patients in managing uncertainty inherent in their situation.

  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Alexander, S.C., Sullivan, A.M., Back, A.L., Tulsky, J.A., Goldman, R.E., Block, S.D., et al., 2012. Information giving and receiving in hematological malignancy consultations. Psychooncology 21, 3, 297-306.
    • Aveyard, H., 2010. Doing a literature review in health and social care: a practical guide, Second ed. Open University Press, Maidenhead.
    • Booth, A., Fry-Smith, A., 2003. e-text on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information resources. Chapter 2: Developing the research question. National Library of Medicine.
    • Available from: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/archive/20060905/nichsr/ehta/chapter2.html (accessed 21.08.14).
    • Boynton, P., Greenhalgh, T., 2004. Selecting, designing and developing your questionnaire.
    • British Medical Journal [Online] 328, 7451 1312-1315. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC420179/pdf/bmj32801312.pdf (accessed 20.08.14).
    • CASP, 2013. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative research. Available from: http://media.wix.com/ugd/dded87_951541699e9edc71ce66c9bac4734c69.pdf (accessed 10.06.14).
    • Cassileth, B.R., Zupkis, R.V., Sutton-Smith, K., March, V., 1980, Information and participation preferences among cancer patients. Annals of Internal Medicine 92 832-836.
    • Cox, A., Jenkins, V., Catt, S., Langridge, C., Fallowfield, L., 2006. Information needs and experiences: An audit of UK cancer patients. European Journal of Oncology Nursing 10 263- 272.
    • Jansen, J., Butow, P.N., van Weert, J.C., van Dulmen, S., Devine, R.J., Heeren, T.J., et al., 2008. Does age really matter? Recall of information presented to newly referred patients with cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 26 5450-7.
    • Jenkins, V., Fallowfield, L., Saul, J., 2001. Information needs of patients with cancer: results of a large study in UK cancer centres. British Journal of Cancer 84 48-51.
    • Kelly, M., Ajmera, M., Bhattacharjee, S., Vohra, R., Hobbs, G., Chaudhary, L., et al., 2013.
    • Perception of cancer recurrence risk: More information is better. Patient Education and Counseling 90 361-366.
    • Lagarde, S.M., Franssen, S.J., van Werven, J.R., Smets, E.M., Tran, T.C., Tilanus, H.W., et al., 2008. Patient preferences for the disclosure of prognosis after esophagectomy for cancer with curative intent. Annals of Surgical Oncology 15 3289-98.
    • Leventhal, H., Kelly, K.M., Leventhal, E., 1999. Population risk, actual risk, perceived risk and cancer control: a discussion. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs 25 81-85.
    • Quirt, C.F., Mackillop, W.J., Ginsburg, A.D., Sheldon, L., Brundage, M., Dixon, P., et al., 1997. Do doctors know when their patients don't?: A survey of doctor-patient communication in lung cancer. Lung Cancer 18 1-20.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article