The present study used the experimental patterns of Go/No Go and no motion contingent negative variation (CNV) task into the research in order to study whether the CNV can express the implication of expectation. Through comparing the CNV under different conditions, the data collected from experiment showed that the key to evoked CNV was close to the warning signal and command signal. Whether the command signal was related to the task would impact on the amplitude of the CNV. This characteristics responses to the subjects' expectation. On this basis, CNV can be used as the electrophysiological index for the reflection of expected value in the conditions of this experiment.
Objective To investigate the impact of shared decision-making (SDM) intervention on treatment expectations, decisional conflict, and satisfaction in patients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors, aiming to provide a basis for optimizing personalized diagnosis and treatment models for oncology patients. MethodsPatients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors who met the inclusion criteria, admitted by a single medical team in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, from November 2024 to May 2025, were randomly assigned to either a SDM group or a control group using a random number table method. The control group received conventional diagnostic and treatment interventions, while the SDM group received SDM-assisted interventions in addition to the conventional care. Baseline characteristics, treatment expectations, decisional conflict, and satisfaction were compared between the two groups. ResultsA total of 137 patients were included (69 patients in the SDM group, 68 patients in the control group). In the SDM group, there were 30 males and 39 females, with a mean age of (53.17±15.13) years. In the control group, there were 22 males and 46 females, with a mean age of (53.19±15.91) years. After intervention, the change score for treatment expectations in the SDM group was significantly lower than that in the control group [–9.0 (–9.0, –8.0) points vs. –2.0 (–3.0, –2.0) points, P<0.001]. The change score for decisional conflict in the SDM group was also significantly lower than that in the control group [–21.0 (–29.0, –12.0) points vs. –4.5 (–14.5, 1.0) points, P<0.001]. However, there was no statistically significant difference in satisfaction between the two groups [SDM group: 10.0 (10.0, 10.0) points vs. control group: 10.0 (10.0, 10.0) points, P=0.552]. ConclusionSDM intervention can effectively reduce the deviation in treatment expectations and decisional conflict in patients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors. It holds important clinical value for enhancing patient engagement in care and optimizing personalized diagnosis and treatment processes.
