The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Informed consent for investigational chemotherapy: patients' and physicians' perceptions.
Abstract
One hundred forty-four patients and 68 physicians at three cancer centers were studied for their perceptions of the consent procedure, in which they participated one to three weeks earlier, for chemotherapy by one of 65 investigational protocols. Patients recalled the procedure positively and relied heavily on physician's advice. They felt most physicians wanted them to accept; 29% felt their participation in the decision was not encouraged. Primary reasons for accepting were trust in the physician, belief the treatment would help, and fear the disease (viewed as highly serious) would get worse without it. Nearly a fourth did not recall the information given that treatment was investigational. The consent form played no role in decision-making for 69%. Physicians believed therapeutic benefits would exceed potential problems for most patients; they viewed 41% of the patients as less than eager for details of treatment, a third as avoiding the seriousness of the discussion, and a third as passive in decision-making. The perceptual set of both parties places inadvertent constraint on patients' autonomy in decision making.
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
Cited by
Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey
Joffe, S., Cook, E. F., Cleary, P. D., Clark, J. W., & Weeks, J. C. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(01)06805-2 · Cited by 655
Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand?
Falagas, M. E., Korbila, I. P., Giannopoulou, K. P., Kondilis, B. K., & Peppas, G. (2009) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.02.010 · Cited by 428
Quality of Informed Consent: a New Measure of Understanding Among Research Subjects
Joffe, S., Cook, E. F., Cleary, P. D., Clark, J. W., & Weeks, J. C. (2001) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/93.2.139 · Cited by 408
Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review
Gaston, C. M., & Mitchell, G. (2005) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.04.015 · Cited by 368
Snowdon, C., Garcia, J., & Elbourne, D. (1997) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(97)00063-4 · Cited by 296
Metadata
- Authors
- Penman, D. T., Holland, J. C., Bahna, G. F., Morrow, G., Schmale, A. H., Derogatis, L. R., Carnrike, C. L., & Cherry, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1984-07
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 849-855
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W1933724083
- Cited by
- 239
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.39
- 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: Informed consent for investigational chemotherapy: patients' and physicians' perceptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1984.2.7.849
- The paper
- Penman, D. T., Holland, J. C., Bahna, G. F., Morrow, G., Schmale, A. H., Derogatis, L. R., Carnrike, C. L., & Cherry, R. (1984). Informed consent for investigational chemotherapy: patients' and physicians' perceptions. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1984.2.7.849
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.