Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Reid, K.; Hicks, C.; Herron-Marx, S. and Parmar, S.
(2009).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215109990934
Abstract
Aim: To investigate whether information about the size of an oral tumour influences the multi-disciplinary team’s judgement about the quality of life of head and neck cancer patients.
Method: Using a between-group design, two groups of health care professionals rated a hypothetical patient on 20 outcome variables. The patient description was identical for both groups, except for the tumour size.
Results: Comparison of variable ratings revealed only three significant differences between the groups’ predictions and no consistency within conditions, suggesting that the participants held few common assumptions about the impact of tumour size on a range of patient experiences.
Conclusion: The lack of agreement amongst the health care professionals suggests that, where humane judgements are used in treatment decisions for head and neck cancer patients, these may be random and inconsistent. Consequently, patients should have a direct input into treatment decisions, via formalised quality of life data.
Viewing alternatives
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from DimensionsItem Actions
Export
About
- Item ORO ID
- 38579
- Item Type
- Journal Item
- ISSN
- 1748-5460
- Keywords
- head and neck cancer; decision making; quality of life
- Academic Unit or School
-
Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS) > Health, Wellbeing and Social Care
Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS) - Copyright Holders
- © 2009 JLO(1984) Limited
- Depositing User
- Sandy Herron-Marx