Daniel Sulmasy to Neoplasms
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Daniel Sulmasy has written about Neoplasms.
Connection Strength
1.667
-
Spiritual Needs and Perception of Quality of Care and Satisfaction With Care in Hematology/Medical Oncology Patients: A Multicultural Assessment. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2018 01; 55(1):56-64.e1.
Score: 0.202
-
Perceptions of control and unrealistic optimism in early-phase cancer trials. J Med Ethics. 2018 02; 44(2):121-127.
Score: 0.202
-
Variations in Unrealistic Optimism Between Acceptors and Decliners of Early Phase Cancer Trials. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017 10; 12(4):280-288.
Score: 0.201
-
Debating the oncologist's role in defining the value of cancer care: our duty is to our patients. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec 20; 32(36):4039-41.
Score: 0.167
-
Unrealistic optimism in early-phase oncology trials. IRB. 2011 Jan-Feb; 33(1):1-8.
Score: 0.128
-
The culture of faith and hope: patients' justifications for their high estimations of expected therapeutic benefit when enrolling in early phase oncology trials. Cancer. 2010 Aug 01; 116(15):3702-11.
Score: 0.124
-
Decision-making in patients with advanced cancer compared with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Med Ethics. 2008 Sep; 34(9):664-8.
Score: 0.109
-
Is failure to meet spiritual needs associated with cancer patients' perceptions of quality of care and their satisfaction with care? J Clin Oncol. 2007 Dec 20; 25(36):5753-7.
Score: 0.103
-
Cancer care, money, and the value of life: whose justice? Which rationality? J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jan 10; 25(2):217-22.
Score: 0.097
-
Dispositional optimism and therapeutic expectations in early-phase oncology trials. Cancer. 2016 Apr 15; 122(8):1238-46.
Score: 0.046
-
Symptom frequency, severity, and quality of life among persons with three disease trajectories: cancer, ALS, and CHF. Appl Nurs Res. 2015 Nov; 28(4):311-5.
Score: 0.043
-
Value of cancer care: ethical considerations for the practicing oncologist. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2014; e146-9.
Score: 0.039
-
A Web-based communication aid for patients with cancer: the CONNECT Study. Cancer. 2013 Apr 01; 119(7):1437-45.
Score: 0.037
-
Research participants' high expectations of benefit in early-phase oncology trials: are we asking the right question? J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 10; 30(35):4396-400.
Score: 0.036
-
Cancer patient preferences for quality and length of life. Cancer. 2008 Dec 15; 113(12):3459-66.
Score: 0.028
-
Using health communication best practices to develop a web-based provider-patient communication aid: the CONNECT study. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Jun; 71(3):378-87.
Score: 0.026
-
How would terminally ill patients have others make decisions for them in the event of decisional incapacity? A longitudinal study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Dec; 55(12):1981-8.
Score: 0.026
-
An exploration of relative health stock in advanced cancer patients. Med Decis Making. 2004 Nov-Dec; 24(6):614-24.
Score: 0.021
-
Cancer, managed care, and therapeutic research: an ethicist's view. HMO Pract. 1997 Jun; 11(2):59-62.
Score: 0.012
-
Expectations of benefit in early-phase clinical trials: implications for assessing the adequacy of informed consent. Med Decis Making. 2008 Jul-Aug; 28(4):575-81.
Score: 0.007
-
Understanding of an aggregate probability statement by patients who are offered participation in Phase I clinical trials. Cancer. 2005 Jan 01; 103(1):140-7.
Score: 0.005
-
Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jul 01; 21(13):2589-96.
Score: 0.005
-
The correlation between patient characteristics and expectations of benefit from Phase I clinical trials. Cancer. 2003 Jul 01; 98(1):166-75.
Score: 0.005