| Title |
Treatment of Early Stage Breast Cancer: do Surgeons and Patients Agree Regarding Whether Treatment Alternatives were Discussed?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, May 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1023903701674 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nancy L. Keating, Jane C. Weeks, Catherine Borbas, Edward Guadagnoli |
| Abstract |
Informing patients of available treatment alternatives is an important element of informed consent. We examined and compared patients' and their surgeons' reports of discussing treatment alternatives for early stage breast cancer. We surveyed early stage breast cancer patients in two states (Minnesota and Massachusetts) about discussions of breast cancer treatments. We also surveyed their surgeons. We compared how often patients' and surgeons' reports about discussions of treatment alternatives agreed, and we used generalized estimating equations to identify factors related to patients' reports that alternatives were not discussed when their surgeons reported that they were discussed. Among 1154 women eligible for both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy, only 71% reported that their surgeon discussed both treatments. Surgeons of 730 women returned surveys and reported discussing both treatments with 82% of the patients. One-third of the time, patients and surgeons disagreed about whether both treatments were discussed; with patients more often reporting that both treatments were not discussed when surgeons reported they were. In adjusted analyses, compared to better-educated patients, less-educated patients more often reported that their surgeons did not discuss both treatments when their surgeons reported that they did (compared to non-high school graduates, odds ratio (OR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-0.87 for high school graduates; OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.27-0.96 for women with at least some college education; and OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.20-1.24 for women with any post-graduate work). Patients' and surgeons' reports of treatments discussed often disagree. Interventions to assure that surgeons present and patients fully comprehend treatment options may help to improve the decision-making process, particularly for less well-educated women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 25% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 June 2017.
All research outputs
#5,225,472
of 25,391,066 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#951
of 4,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,235
of 55,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,391,066 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 55,151 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.