The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Oncologists' reactions to cancer patients' verbal cues
Abstract
The diagnosis and treatment of cancer cause considerable psychological distress and morbidity. Consequently, cancer patients have high needs for informational and emotional support and doctors vary in their ability to recognise and address these needs. This study investigated patients' attempts to gain informational and emotional support through the use of verbal cues. The sample consisted of 298 patients with heterogeneous cancers, seeing one of five medical and four radiation oncologists for the first time. Sociodemographic variables and patient anxiety and satisfaction ratings were obtained. Transcripts of the audiotaped consultations were analysed and question‐asking, use of indirect cues, cue type (informational or emotional), content categories in which questions and cues occurred and doctor response (responded to or not responded to), were recorded. Patients asked a median of 11 questions and gave two cues per consultation, usually during treatment discussions. Patients gave, and doctors responded to, more informational than emotional cues. Patients gave significantly more informational cues during longer consultations. Younger and female patients gave more cues for emotional support and asked questions. No demographic variables were associated with the doctors' response to emotional and informational cues; however, consultations in which more informational cues were responded to were shorter, even when controlling for the number of cues given. Satisfaction with the consultation and patient anxiety were unaffected by doctors' responses to cues. Overall, results showed that doctors effectively identify and respond to the majority of informational cues; however, they are less observant of and able to address cues for emotional support. Cues can be addressed without lengthening the consultation or increasing patient anxiety. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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
Meyer, T. J., & Mark, M. M. (1995) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.14.2.101 · Cited by 689
Communicative styles and adaptations in physician–parent consultations
Street, R. L. (1992) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/0277-9536(92)90289-3 · Cited by 196
Cited by
Oncologist Communication About Emotion During Visits With Patients With Advanced Cancer
Pollak, K. I., Arnold, R. M., Jeffreys, A. S., Alexander, S. C., Olsen, M. K., Abernethy, A. P., Sugg Skinner, C., Rodriguez, K. L., & Tulsky, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.12.4180 · Cited by 406
A systematic review of the associations between empathy measures and patient outcomes in cancer care
Lelorain, S., Brédart, A., Dolbeault, S., & Sultan, S. (2012) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.2115 · Cited by 289
Brandes, K., Linn, A. J., Butow, P. N., & van Weert, J. C. M. (2015) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3637 · Cited by 233
Self-citationWilkinson, S., Perry, R., Blanchard, K., & Linsell, L. (2008) · Palliative Medicine · doi:10.1177/0269216308090770 · Cited by 157
Ruland, C. M., Holte, H. H., Roislien, J., Heaven, C., Hamilton, G. A., Kristiansen, J., Sandbaek, H., Kvaloy, S. O., Hasund, L., & Ellison, M. C. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2010.005660 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Butow, P. N., Brown, R. F., Cogar, S., Tattersall, M. H. N., & Dunn, S. M.
- Venue
- Psycho-Oncology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 47-58
- ISSN
- 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1611
- OpenAlex
- W1988119144
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 17.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Oncologists' reactions to cancer patients' verbal cues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pon.556
- The paper
- Butow, P. N., Brown, R. F., Cogar, S., Tattersall, M. H. N., & Dunn, S. M. (2002). Oncologists' reactions to cancer patients' verbal cues. Psycho-Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.556
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.