Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 398

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The communication goals and needs of cancer patients: a review

Hack, Thomas F., Degner, Lesley F., Parker, Patricia A.·2005·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

The aim of this review paper is to critique the empirical literature pertaining to the communication needs and goals of cancer patients, and to provide direction for research in this area. According to the conceptual framework of Feldman‐Stewart et al., patient–physician communication occurs for the fundamental purpose of addressing each participant's goal(s). This review is divided into two categories of goals: (a) optimal medical management of the cancer, and (b) optimal attention to the patient's psychosocial response to cancer. Optimal medical management includes discussions about disease status and the treatment plan, and the effectiveness of these discussions is frequently determined by assessing patient understanding, satisfaction, and well‐being. The literature suggests that cancer patients continue to have unmet communication needs, and communication outcomes are enhanced when physicians attend to the emotional needs of patients. Research gaps in communication research are highlighted, including the need for additional study of several external factors affecting the patient and provider. Copyright © 2005 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pon.949

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 398

Metadata

Authors
Hack, T. F., Degner, L. F., & Parker, P. A.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-09-30
Volume
14
Issue
10
Pages
831-845
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W1977982721
Cited by
398
References
6
FWCI
24.80
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

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.