FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2891338041> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2891338041 abstract "6586 Background: Advanced cancer patients often have a poor understanding of their cancer prognosis. Goals of Care (GoC) discussions provide information about the cancer, its treatment & prognosis and elicit patient values. Little is known about the best ways to enhance patient understanding, clarify values and move GoC discussions earlier in the disease process. We report the effect of coaching oncologists on GoC discussions. Methods: We recruited oncologists & their advanced cancer patients with < 2 year prognosis to a RCT testing a coaching model communication skills training. Patients were surveyed after their post-imaging visit. We define GoC discussions as patient report that their doctor talked about their cancer prognosis and clarified things most important to them given their disease. Outcome variables assess the impact of GoC on patients’ knowledge on what to expect and clarity of values. Results: We enrolled 22/25 (88%) oncologists and 70% of eligible patients of whom 96 (55%) completed a survey. On average, doctors were 44 yrs old (32-66) and in practice 14.5 yrs (5-40). Patients’ mean age was 62 yrs (20-95), 40% females, 58% white, 24% Latino & 22 % black. Overall, 2/3 of patients reported their treatment’s goal was to cure their cancer; 14% reported cure to be unlikely. Patients felt more knowledgeable (79% vs 21%; p = 0.02) when their doctors discussed treatments, side effects & quality of life. When patients were asked about things important to them, they report being a bit clearer about their values (65% vs 35%; p = 0.16). Compared to controls, intervention patients felt more knowledgeable (78% v 63%; p = 0.17) but did not feel clearer about their values (60% v 54%; p = 0.59). Multivariate modeling found that poor health literacy (OR = 0.2; 95%CI: 0.07-0.82), having a GoC discussion (OR = 10.2; 1.7-63.1) and being in the intervention group (OR = 8.8; 1.4-55.2) significantly affected knowledge (model c = 0.88; p < 0.01). However, discussing what’s important to patients did not help patients feel clearer about their values (OR = 2.7; 0.6-12.2; model c = 0.82; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Using a coaching model to teach oncologists communication skills may improve patients’ understanding of what to expect with their cancer but does not impact their clarity of values. Clinical trial information: NCT02374255." @default.
• W2891338041 created "2018-09-27" @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5011519603 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5011884494 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5026330839 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5027148722 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5036141442 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5060002029 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5066205851 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5075172372 @default.
• W2891338041 creator A5085028747 @default.
• W2891338041 date "2017-05-20" @default.
• W2891338041 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W2891338041 title "Does coaching goals of care discussion skills make a difference?" @default.
• W2891338041 doi "https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.6586" @default.
• W2891338041 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2891338041 type Work @default.
• W2891338041 sameAs 2891338041 @default.
• W2891338041 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2891338041 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5011519603 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5011884494 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5026330839 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5027148722 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5036141442 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5060002029 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5066205851 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5075172372 @default.
• W2891338041 hasAuthorship W2891338041A5085028747 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C2779363792 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C509550671 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C542102704 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C15744967 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C159110408 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C2779363792 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C509550671 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C542102704 @default.
• W2891338041 hasConceptScore W2891338041C71924100 @default.
• W2891338041 hasLocation W28913380411 @default.
• W2891338041 hasOpenAccess W2891338041 @default.
• W2891338041 hasPrimaryLocation W28913380411 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W1990089869 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W1999445029 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2016695865 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2058064838 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2070079798 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2098400465 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2131785258 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2149516974 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2321328408 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2618755638 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2803395722 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2891715570 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2901450575 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2972523166 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W3000496607 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W3031962090 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W3107201262 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W3201034664 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W616747703 @default.
• W2891338041 hasRelatedWork W2782728408 @default.
• W2891338041 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2891338041 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2891338041 magId "2891338041" @default.
• W2891338041 workType "article" @default.