How does the frame of communication affect cancer patients' decisions?-from a behavioral economics point of view.

BACKGROUND:It has been said that physicians should provide their patients with accurate evidence in terms of information on treatment options. However, in some cases, although the physician provides accurate and sufficient information, the patient still chooses the medically not-recommended treatment. The purpose of this research is to clarify how patients' decisions differ when a physician changes the frame of an explanation when he/she provides information about cancer treatment. METHODS:An online questionnaire survey was conducted in March 2017. Through the aid of a survey company, we emailed questionnaires to 1,360 cancer patients who received treatment within the last 2 years. We randomly assigned participants to 6 hypotheticals scenario of a terminal cancer patient, and presented hypothetical evidence in different ways. Subsequently, we asked survey participants whether they would choose to receive additional anti-cancer treatment. RESULTS:Although there was no statistically significant difference between scenarios, the "social burden" groups showed a lower rate of patients who preferred to continue a medically ineffective anti-cancer treatment than the control group, at a 10% significance level. The scenario significantly affected the patients' sense of abandonment [F(5, 1,354)=5.680, P<0.001], sense of distress [F(5, 1,354)=3.920, P=0.002], and necessity of improvement [F(5, 1,354)=2.783, P=0.017]. CONCLUSIONS:Nudges were not shown to be effective in situations where discontinuation of anticancer treatment was being considered. On the other hand, some nudges were found to be invasive and should be used with caution.