Although the complexities inherent in human communication make it a difficult target for empirical investigation and systematic interpretation, it is well recognized that patientprovider communication can have either a powerfully negative or positive influence on the experience of cancer. Drawing on an extensive data set derived from interviews with 200 cancer patients, the authors examine the impact of information provided in numerical form within cancer care communications from the patient perspective. In this context, they present findings related to various uses and abuses of numbers within cancer care communication, and illustrate how numerical information constitutes a specialized communication form with considerable potency for shaping the cancer experience. In particular, accounts of the thematic relationship between numbers and hope, from the perspective of those on the receiving end of cancer care, provide a unique perspective from which to interpret issues of compassion, caring, and informed consent.
Back, A. L., Arnold, R. M., Baile, W. F., Tulsky, J. A., & Fryer-Edwards, K. (2005). Approaching difficult communication tasks in oncology. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 55, 164-177.
2.
Baile, W. F., & Aaron, J. (2005). Patient-physician communication in oncology: Past, present, and future. Current Opinion in Oncology, 17(4), 331-335.
3.
Balmer, C. E., Thomas, P.,& Osborne, R. J. (2001). Who wants second-line, palliative chemotherapy?Psycho-Oncology, 10(5), 410-418.
4.
Bredart, A., Bouleuc, C.,& Dolbeault, S. (2005). Doctor-patient communication and satisfaction with care in oncology. Current Opinion in Oncology, 17(4), 351-354.
5.
Butow, P. N., Dowsett, S., Hagerty, R., & Tattersall, M. H. (2002). Communicating prognosis to patients with metastatic disease: What do they really want to know?Supportive Care in Cancer, 10(2), 161-168.
6.
de Bruin, W. B., Fischhoff, B., Millstein, S. G., & Halpern-Felsher, B. L. (2000). Verbal and numerical expressions of probability: “It's a fifty-fifty chance.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81(1), 115-131.
7.
Edwards, A., & Elwyn, G. (2001). Understanding risk and lessons for clinical risk communication about treatment preferences. Qualitative Health Care, 10(Suppl. 1), i9-i13.
8.
Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., Covey, J., Matthews, E.,& Pill, R. (2001). Presenting risk information—A review of the effects of “framing” and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Health Communication, 6(1), 61-82.
9.
Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Gwyn, R. (1999). General practice registrar responses to the use of different risk communication tools in simulated consultations: A focus group study. British Medical Journal, 319(7212), 749-752.
10.
Fallowfield, L.,& Jenkins, V. (2004). Communicating sad, bad, and difficult news in medicine. The Lancet, 363(9405), 312-319.
11.
Fischhoff, B. (1999). Why (cancer) risk communication can be hard. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 7-13.
12.
Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F. X., & Reis-Bergan, M. (1999). The effect of risk communication on risk perceptions: the significance of individual differences. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 94-100.
13.
Godolphin, W. (2003). The role of risk communication in shared decision making: First lets get to choices [Editorial]. British Medical Journal, 327, 692-693.
14.
Gurm, H. S.,& Litaker, D. G. (2000). Framing procedural risks to patients: Is 99% safe the same as a risk of 1 in 100?Academic Medicine, 75(8), 840-842.
15.
Gyrd-Hansen, D., Kristiansen, I. S., Nexoe, J.,& Nielsen, J. B. (2003). Howdo individuals apply risk information when choosing among health care interventions?Risk Analysis, 23(4), 697-704.
16.
Hagerty, R. G., Butow, P. N., Ellis, P. M., Dimitry, S.,& Tattersall, M. H. (2005). Communicating prognosis in cancer care: A systematic review of the literature. Annals of Oncology, 16(7), 1005-1053.
17.
Hagerty, R. G., Butow, P. N., Ellis, P. M., Lobb, E. A., Pendlebury, S. C., Leighl, N., et al. (2005). Communicating with realism and hope: Incurable cancer patients' views on the disclosure of prognosis. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23(6), 1278-1288.
18.
Kaplowitz, S. A., Campo, S.,& Chiu, W. T. (2002). Cancer patients' desires for communication of prognosis information. Health Communication, 14(2), 221-241.
19.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.
20.
Lloyd, A. J. (2001). The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Qualitative Health Care, 10(Suppl. 1), i14-i18.
21.
Mackillop, W.,& Quirt, C. F. (1997). Measuring the accuracy of prognostic judgments in oncology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(1), 21-29.
22.
Marteau, T. M. (1999). Communicating genetic risk information. British Medical Bulletin, 55(2), 414-428.
23.
Misselbrook, D., & Armstrong, D. (2001). Patients' responses to risk information about the benefits of treating hypertension. British Journal of General Practice, 51(465), 276-279.
24.
Ohnishi, M., Fukui, T., Matsui, K., Hira, K., Shinozuka, M., Ezaki, H., et al. (2002). Interpretation of and preference for probability expressions among Japanese patients and physicians. Family Practice, 19(1), 7-11.
25.
Sachs, L., Taube, A.,& Tishelman, C. (2001). Risk in numbers: Difficulties in the transformation of genetic knowledge from research to people—The case of hereditary cancer. Acta Oncologica, 40(4), 445-453.
26.
Schofield, P. E., & Butow, P. N. (2004). Towards better communication in cancer care: A framework for developing evidence-based interventions. Patient Education & Counseling, 55(1), 32-39.
27.
Thorne, S., Bultz, B., & Baile, W., & the SCRN Communication Team. (2005). What are the costs of poor communication in cancer care? A critical integrative review of the existing empirical evidence. Psycho-Oncology, 14, 875-884.
28.
Thorne, S., Reimer Kirkham, S., & MacDonald-Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description: A noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Research in Nursing& Health, 20, 169-177.
29.
Thorne, S., Reimer Kirkham, S., & O’Flynn-Magee, K. (2004). The analytic challenge in interpretive description. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), Article 1. Retrieved April 19, 2004, from http://www.ualberta.ca/iiqm/backissues/3_1/pdf/thorneetal.pdf
30.
Tishelman, C., Forss, A., Sachs, L., Lundgren, E., Widmark, C.,& Tornberg, S. (1999). Research on risk and risk in research: Theoretical and practical experiences from a multidisciplinary study on cervical cancer screening in urban Sweden. Qualitative Health Research, 9, 45-60.
31.
Turner, J., Zapart, S., Pedersen, K., Rankin, N., Luxford, K., Fletcher, J., et al. (2005). Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 14(3), 159-173.
32.
Vernon, S. W. (1999). Risk perception and risk communication for cancer screening behaviors: A review. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 101-119.
33.
Walter, F. M.,& Britten, N. (2002). Patients' understanding of risk: A qualitative study of decision-making about the menopause and hormone replacement therapy in general practice. Family Practice, 19(6), 579-586.
