The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Breaking bad news: consensus guidelines for medical practitioners.
Abstract
PURPOSE AND DESIGN: One of the more difficult tasks that clinicians must perform as part of their care of patients is that of conveying bad news, such as a severe diagnosis or death. However, there is a paucity of empirically founded information that relates to the specific steps for breaking bad news. We report on a set of guidelines for breaking bad news that was developed using a consensus process and incorporates the views of medical oncologists, general practitioners, surgeons, nurse consultants, social workers, clergy, human rights representatives, cancer patients, hospital interns, and clinical directors of medical schools in Australia. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: It is recommended that further research be undertaken in a number of areas. First, there is a need to assess patients' versus providers' perceptions of the importance of each of the steps in breaking bad news, in order to define criteria for minimal levels of competence in this area. Second, controlled trials are needed to assess the effectiveness of the guidelines in changing clinical practice, and to identify the most effective strategies for breaking bad news to patients.
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
Evaluating the quality of medical care
DONABEDIAN, A. (2005) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x · Cited by 6,102
Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use
Fink, A., Kosecoff, J., Chassin, M., & Brook, R. H. (1984) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.74.9.979 · Cited by 2,089
The Silent World of Doctor and Patient
Katz, J. (2002) · Johns Hopkins University Press eBooks · doi:10.56021/9780801857805 · Cited by 992
Korsch, B. M., & Negrete, V. F. (1972) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0872-66 · Cited by 802
Changes in Physicians' Attitudes Toward Telling the Cancer Patient
Novack, D. H. (1979) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1979.03290350017012 · Cited by 707
What to Tell Cancer Patients: A Study of Medical Attitudes
Oken, D. (1961) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1961.03040130004002 · Cited by 632
Breaking bad news: why is it still so difficult?
Buckman, R. (1984) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.288.6430.1597 · Cited by 607
Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: An Assessment of the Effectiveness of 169 Interventions
(1990) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-112-9-720_2 · Cited by 543
Interpersonal Relationships and Cancer: A Theoretical Analysis
Wortman, C. B., & Dunkel‐Schetter, C. (1979) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1979.tb00792.x · Cited by 487
Words Without Action? The Production, Dissemination, And Impact Of Consensus Recommendations
Lomas, J. (1991) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.12.1.41 · Cited by 274
Cited by
SPIKES—A Six-Step Protocol for Delivering Bad News: Application to the Patient with Cancer
Baile, W. F., Buckman, R., Lenzi, R., Glober, G., Beale, E. A., & Kudelka, A. P. (2000) · The Oncologist · doi:10.1634/theoncologist.5-4-302 · Cited by 3,075
Halpern, J. (2003) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x · Cited by 710
Communicating with realism and hope: incurable cancer patients' views on the disclosure of prognosis
Hagerty, R. G., Butow, P. N., Ellis, P. M., Lobb, E. A., Pendlebury, S. C., Leighl, N., Mac Leod, C., & Tattersall, M. H. N. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.11.138 · Cited by 582
Murray, S. A. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7370.929 · Cited by 521
Communicating prognosis in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature
Hagerty, R. G., Butow, P. N., Ellis, P. M., Dimitry, S., & Tattersall, M. H. N. (2005) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdi211 · Cited by 504
Metadata
- Authors
- Girgis, A., & Sanson-Fisher, R. W.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2449-2456
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2116502213
- Cited by
- 431
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 25.55
- 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: Breaking bad news: consensus guidelines for medical practitioners. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1995.13.9.2449
- The paper
- Girgis, A., & Sanson-Fisher, R. W. (1995). Breaking bad news: consensus guidelines for medical practitioners. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1995.13.9.2449
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.
