Harmful communication behaviors in cancer care: A systematic review of patients and family caregivers perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: Issues regarding clinician communication remain an important source of complaints within healthcare. This systematic review aims to determine cancer patients' and their family caregivers' views on which clinicians' communication behaviors can harm (i.e. eliciting negative feelings/consequences for patients/family caregivers). METHODS: We searched for all types of peer-reviewed studies that determined adult (≥18 years) cancer patients' and/or family caregivers' perspectives on which clinicians' communication behaviors can harm in several databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier), supplemented by expert-consultation. Studies were screened using the Artificial intelligence screening tool of ASReview and data was analyzed using Thematic Analysis. To assess the quality of the studies the Qualsyst critical appraisal tool was used. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies were included. Four main themes of harmful communication behaviors were identified: (1) Lack of tailored information provision (e.g. giving too little or too much/specific information) (2) Lack of tailored decision making (ranging from; patient exclusion, to the patients' responsibility, and/or haste) (3) Lack of feeling seen and heard (seen as a disease, not as a human being; not listened to concerns and emotions) (4) Lack of feeling held and remembered (forgotten agreements; lack of care continuity). CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal an overview of patients' and family caregivers' perspectives on which clinicians' communication behaviors can harm. Harm could be prevented when information and decision involvement are tailored and patients' and family caregivers' needs to feel seen, heard, held and remembered are met.

Mapping the evidence on identity processes and identity-related interventions in the smoking and physical activity domains: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking and insufficient physical activity (PA), independently but especially in conjunction, often lead to disease and (premature) death. For this reason, there is need for effective smoking cessation and PA-increasing interventions. Identity-related interventions which aim to influence how people view themselves offer promising prospects, but an overview of the existing evidence is needed first. This is the protocol for a scoping review aiming to aggregate the evidence on identity processes and identity-related interventions in the smoking and physical activity domains. METHODS: The scoping review will be guided by an adaption by Levac et al of the 2005 Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework, the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: Extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) and the 2017 Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. It will include scientific publications discussing identity (processes) and/or identity-related interventions in the context of smoking (cessation) and/or physical (in)activity, in individuals aged 12 and over. A systematic search will be carried out in multiple databases (eg, PubMed, Web of Science). Records will be independently screened against prepiloted inclusion/exclusion criteria by two reviewers, using the Active Learning for Systematic Reviews machine learning artificial intelligence and Rayyan QCRI, a screening assistant. A prepiloted charting table will be used to extract data from included full-text articles. Findings will be reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and include study quality assessment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for scoping reviews. Findings will aid the development of future identity-related interventions targeting smoking and physical inactivity.