Patient and family satisfaction with cancer-related information: A review of the literature
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Individuals and families confronted with cancer experience many and varied educational needs.Cancer education is an important aspect of their care.Yet, over the past three decades, the literature has consistently identified that many patients and family members are dissatisfied with cancer education.This paper examines the literature relevant to one aspect of satisfaction with cancer education, patient and family member satisfaction with cancer-related information, according to patient, provider, and information factors.Gaps in the research are identified and discussed in relation to future research recommendations.The paper concludes with applications to clinical practice.Education is considered important for anyone dealing with a health problem, but individuals and families dealing with cancer perceive education to be of paramount importance.Individuals with cancer and their families tend to want as much information as possible about the diagnosis, treatment, and other aspects of cancer care, whether this information is good or bad (Cassileth, Zupkis, Sutton-Smith, & March, 1980;Jones et al., 1999;Tattersall, Butow, Griffin, & Dunn, 1994;Turner, Maher, Young, Young, & Hudson, 1996).The need for new information and skills throughout the entire cancer experience is great.Individuals and families must deal with the varied phases of the experience, the pervasiveness of the illness, and the continuous, and often rapidly-changing needs.A considerable body of research has focused on patient satisfaction with cancer care in general.Less attention has been devoted specifically to satisfaction with patient education.Yet, Sitzia and Wood (1998a) identified patient education as one of four components of satisfaction for cancer outpatients.While giving and receiving information is recognized as an important part of the educational process, there has been limited exploration of patient satisfaction with the information received.Patient dissatisfaction with information provision dates back to the 1970s (Risser, 1975).Accumulating evidence since that time suggests that patients with cancer, irrespective of the type of cancer or the phase of the illness, are often dissatisfied with the information they receive (Northouse, Schafer, Tipton, & Metivier, 1999; Sitzia & Wood, 1998a, 1998b).The prevailing dissatisfaction heightens the importance of understanding the factors that influence patient satisfaction with information provision (Cassileth et al., 1980;Derdiarian, 1989;Fitch, Johnson, Gray, & Franssen, 1999).The purpose of this paper is to examine research related to patients' and family members' satisfaction with cancer information.We will present a synthesis and analysis of the available literature related to patient and family satisfaction with cancer information.The paper will conclude by highlighting gaps in existing research and offering implications for clinical practice and future research. Patient-and family-related factorsResearch supports patient-and family-related factors as important determinants of information satisfaction.A range of patient-and family-related factors that appear to influence satisfaction has been identified.These factors include expectations, preferences for type of information, information-seeking, anxiety, demographics, and compliance. ExpectationsThe general satisfaction literature suggests that expectations influence patient satisfaction with care among patients from medicalsurgical, gynecologic, and specialty inpatient units (Abramowitz, Coté, & Berry, 1987;Green, Coupland, & Kitzinger, 1990).How expectations interact with patient satisfaction in the cancer population is relatively unclear because there has been limited study of this Patient and family satisfaction with cancer-related information: A review of the literature
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».