The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring therapeutic alliance between oncologists and patients with advanced cancer: The Human Connection Scale
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Patients consider their human connection with a physician an important aspect of end‐of‐life (EOL) care. In this study, the authors sought to develop and validate a measure of therapeutic alliance between patients with advanced cancer and their physicians and to evaluate the effects of therapeutic alliance on EOL experiences and care. METHODS: The Human Connection (THC) scale was developed to measure the extent to which patients felt a sense of mutual understanding, caring, and trust with their physicians. The scale was administered to 217 patients with advanced cancer along with measures of attributes that have been related hypothetically to therapeutic alliance, including emotional acceptance of terminal illness. EOL outcomes in 90 patients who died during the study also were examined. RESULTS: The 16‐item THC questionnaire was consistent internally (Cronbach α = .90) and valid based on its expected positive association with emotional acceptance of terminal illness (r = .31; P < .0001). THC scores were related inversely to symptom burden (r = −.19; P = .006), functional status (Karnofsky performance status; r = .22; P = .001), and mental illness (THC score: 50.69 for patients with any Diagnostic and Statistical Manual [DSM] diagnosis vs 55.22 for patients with no DSM diagnosis; P = .03). THC scores were not associated significantly with EOL discussions (P = .68). Among the patients who died, EOL intensive care unit (ICU) care was associated inversely with therapeutic alliance (THC score: 46.5 for patients who received ICU care vs 55.5 for patients without ICU care; P = .002), so that patients with higher THC scores were less likely to spend time in the ICU during the last week of life. CONCLUSIONS: The THC scale is a valid and reliable measure of therapeutic alliance between patients with advanced cancer and their physicians. In addition, there was no evidence to suggest that EOL discussions harm patients' therapeutic alliance. A strong therapeutic alliance was associated with emotional acceptance of a terminal illness and with decreased ICU care at the EOL among patients with advanced cancer. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
You want to measure coping but your protocol’ too long: Consider the brief cope
Carver, C. S. (1997) · International Journal of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6 · Cited by 7,361
Relation of the therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: a meta-analytic review
Martin, D. J., Garske, J. P., & Davis, M. K. (2000) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-006x.68.3.438 · Cited by 3,355
Relationship between cancer patients' predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences
Weeks, J. C. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.21.1709 · Cited by 1,319
The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy.
Horvath, A. O., & Luborsky, L. (1993) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.61.4.561 · Cited by 1,279
Collaborative Management of Chronic Illness
Von Korff, M., Gruman, J., Schaefer, J., Curry, S. J., & Wagner, E. H. (1997) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-127-12-199712150-00008 · Cited by 1,269 · cited 1×
“$31,000-50,999 36 (17) $51,000-99,999 38 (18) ‡$100,000 27 (13) Do not know 42 (20) Refused/missing 10 (5) Health insurance 171/213 (80)”
Mack, J. W., Nilsson, M., Balboni, T., Friedlander, R. J., Block, S. D., Trice, E., & Prigerson, H. G. (2008) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.23476 · Cited by 155
Self-citationThe alliance as mediator of expectancy effects in short-term individual therapy
Joyce, A. S., Ogrodniczuk, J. S., Piper, W. E., & McCallum, M. (2003) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.71.4.672 · Cited by 135
Cited by
Wright, A. A., Keating, N. L., Balboni, T. A., Matulonis, U. A., Block, S. D., & Prigerson, H. G. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.26.3863 · Cited by 797
Self-citationCommunication skills training for healthcare professionals working with people who have cancer
Moore, P. M., Rivera Mercado, S., Grez Artigues, M., & Lawrie, T. A. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003751.pub3 · Cited by 452
Enzinger, A. C., Zhang, B., Schrag, D., & Prigerson, H. G. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.61.9239 · Cited by 379
Self-citationWright, A. A., Zhang, B., Keating, N. L., Weeks, J. C., & Prigerson, H. G. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g1219 · Cited by 340
Self-citationEpstein, R. M., Duberstein, P. R., Fenton, J. J., Fiscella, K., Hoerger, M., Tancredi, D. J., Xing, G., Gramling, R., Mohile, S., Franks, P., et al. (2016) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4373 · Cited by 316
Metadata
- Authors
- Mack, J. W., Block, S. D., Nilsson, M., Wright, A., Trice, E., Friedlander, R., Paulk, E., & Prigerson, H. G.
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-05-29
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 3302-3311
- ISSN
- 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0142
- OpenAlex
- W2015569008
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 4.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring therapeutic alliance between oncologists and patients with advanced cancer: The Human Connection Scale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.24360
- The paper
- Mack, J. W., Block, S. D., Nilsson, M., Wright, A., Trice, E., Friedlander, R., Paulk, E., & Prigerson, H. G. (2009). Measuring therapeutic alliance between oncologists and patients with advanced cancer: The Human Connection Scale. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24360
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.