Exploring the Influence of Decisionmaking Style and Financial Status of Cancer Patients on Varied Cultural Aspects of Decision Process

IF 0.9 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychology and Developing Societies Pub Date : 2024-03-11 DOI:10.1177/09713336241233715
Nishtha Jain, Purnima Singh
{"title":"Exploring the Influence of Decisionmaking Style and Financial Status of Cancer Patients on Varied Cultural Aspects of Decision Process","authors":"Nishtha Jain, Purnima Singh","doi":"10.1177/09713336241233715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Though many studies have linked shared decision-making with positive patient outcomes and patient satisfaction, there is less research on the practicality and feasibility of such an approach, specifically, in India. Recent findings indicate that contextual constraints of the patients and family caregivers are fused with and inevitably shape their decision-making style. This study investigates the influence of individual (paternalistic and shared decision-making style) and contextual (financial status of the patients) factors on certain cultural aspects of decision process, namely, trust in doctors, patient’s agency, emotional distress and attribution of responsibility. Data were collected using a survey questionnaire from a sample of 306 participants. Linear mixed models were used to analyse the responses. The results indicate that a shift towards shared approaches does yield qualitatively superior outcomes in terms of increased trust in doctors and patients’ agency along with reduced emotional distress. The study also emphasises the role of cultural metaphysical beliefs in attributing responsibility for treatment decisions. Further, low financial status was found to be associated with higher trust in doctors, lower patient agency, and increased emotional distress for both patients and family caregivers. The move towards shared decision-making, considering the contextual realities of patients, could be instrumental in addressing critical issues, such as prevalence of collusion, superficial role of informed consent, and high reliance on doctors’ authority or expertise.","PeriodicalId":54177,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Developing Societies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Developing Societies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09713336241233715","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Though many studies have linked shared decision-making with positive patient outcomes and patient satisfaction, there is less research on the practicality and feasibility of such an approach, specifically, in India. Recent findings indicate that contextual constraints of the patients and family caregivers are fused with and inevitably shape their decision-making style. This study investigates the influence of individual (paternalistic and shared decision-making style) and contextual (financial status of the patients) factors on certain cultural aspects of decision process, namely, trust in doctors, patient’s agency, emotional distress and attribution of responsibility. Data were collected using a survey questionnaire from a sample of 306 participants. Linear mixed models were used to analyse the responses. The results indicate that a shift towards shared approaches does yield qualitatively superior outcomes in terms of increased trust in doctors and patients’ agency along with reduced emotional distress. The study also emphasises the role of cultural metaphysical beliefs in attributing responsibility for treatment decisions. Further, low financial status was found to be associated with higher trust in doctors, lower patient agency, and increased emotional distress for both patients and family caregivers. The move towards shared decision-making, considering the contextual realities of patients, could be instrumental in addressing critical issues, such as prevalence of collusion, superficial role of informed consent, and high reliance on doctors’ authority or expertise.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探讨癌症患者的决策风格和财务状况对决策过程中不同文化方面的影响
尽管许多研究都将共同决策与积极的患者治疗效果和患者满意度联系在一起,但关于这种方法的实用性和可行性的研究却较少,特别是在印度。最近的研究结果表明,病人和家庭照顾者的环境限制因素与他们的决策风格融合在一起,并不可避免地影响着他们的决策风格。本研究探讨了个人因素(家长式决策风格和共同决策风格)和环境因素(患者的经济状况)对决策过程中某些文化方面的影响,即对医生的信任、患者的代理权、情绪困扰和责任归属。研究使用调查问卷收集了 306 位参与者的数据。采用线性混合模型对回答进行分析。结果表明,向共同方法的转变在质量上确实产生了更优越的结果,即增加了对医生的信任和病人的代理权,同时减少了情绪困扰。研究还强调了文化形而上学信仰在治疗决定责任归属中的作用。此外,研究还发现,经济状况较差与医生信任度较高、患者自主性较低以及患者和家庭护理人员的情绪困扰增加有关。考虑到患者的实际情况,走向共同决策可能有助于解决一些关键问题,如串通的普遍性、知情同意的肤浅作用以及对医生权威或专业知识的高度依赖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychology and Developing Societies
Psychology and Developing Societies PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Get a better perspective on the role of psychology in the developing world in Psychology and Developing Societies. This unique journal features a common platform for debate by psychologists from various parts of the world; articles based on alternate paradigms, indigenous concepts, and relevant methods for social policies in developing societies; and the unique socio-cultural and historical experiences of developing countries compared to Euro-American societies.
期刊最新文献
Validating Cognitive and Emotional Urges in Comprehending One’s Surroundings: The Case of Attraction from Attitudes Exploring the Influence of Decisionmaking Style and Financial Status of Cancer Patients on Varied Cultural Aspects of Decision Process The Effects of Intermarriages Versus Intramarriages on Intergroup Relationships Among Kurdish Tribes IAPS in India: A Cross-cultural Validation Study of Highly Arousing Emotional Pictures Applying Self-Determination Theory to International Development and Humanitarian Organisations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1