背景：甲状腺癌是我国最常见的内分泌肿瘤。关于患者参与共同决策（SDM）过程的程度的问题仍然存在；这对于考虑低风险甲状腺乳头状癌 (PTC) 治疗方案的患者尤其重要。在本研究中，我们旨在探讨中国年轻人的 SDM 经验与低危 PTC 治疗选择的关系。方法：该研究采用定性描述性设计和半结构化访谈。对 2023 年 3 月至 2024 年 5 月期间诊断为低危 (PTC) 的 24 名患者（年龄从 18 岁至 38 岁；4 名男性和 20 名女性）进行了访谈。24 名患者中，有 22 名患者的肿瘤大小为 1 厘米或更小;最大的肿瘤尺寸为1.47厘米。反思性主题分析用于从转录的访谈中识别关键主题。结果：分析显示，年轻低危PTC患者的SDM经历涉及四个主题：信息共享的挑战；寻求信息的原因；影响决策的因素；以及治疗决策中的自我定位。确定了与治疗决策相关的三种自我立场。其中包括依赖定位，这反映了“家长式”决策模式；协同定位，体现决策的“共享”；和自主定位，反映出个人在管理健康和参与决策方面的责任感增强。提供的治疗选择有限、医学术语的过度使用以及临床医生和患者之间的沟通差距是信息共享过程中描述的主要挑战。医患咨询后需要保留的信息导致了积极的信息寻求行为。本研究中确定的可能影响决策过程的关键变量是未来的个人考虑、讨论癌症时使用的语言以及负面情绪。结论：这些结果强调了在低风险 PTC 的医患互动背景下支持协作治疗决策时采取灵活策略的必要性。基于这些发现，临床医生可以采取措施提高 SDM 的质量，方法是询问患者的角色偏好、提供全方位治疗方案的详细信息，并鼓励患者分享与可能的治疗方案相关的偏好和担忧。

Background: Thyroid cancer is the most common endocrine neoplasm in China. Questions regarding the extent of patient involvement in shared decision-making (SDM) processes persist; this is particularly pertinent to patients considering treatment options for low-risk papillary thyroid cancer (PTC). In this study, we aimed to explore Chinese young adults' experiences of SDM relating to the choice of treatment for low-risk PTC. Methods: The study used a qualitative descriptive design and semistructured interviews. Interviews were conducted with 24 patients (ages ranging from 18 to 38 years; 4 men and 20 women) diagnosed with low-risk (PTC) between March 2023 and May 2024. Twenty-two of 24 patients' tumor size measured 1 cm or smaller; the largest tumor size measured 1.47 cm. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes from the transcribed interviews. Results: The analysis revealed that the SDM experiences of young patients with low-risk PTC involve four themes: challenges in information sharing; reasons for information seeking; factors influencing decision making; and self-positioning in treatment decision making. Three self-positions relating to treatment decision making were identified. These included dependent positioning, which reflects a "paternalistic" decision-making pattern; collaborative positioning, reflecting a "sharing" of decision making; and autonomous positioning, reflecting an increased sense of personal responsibility for both managing their health and engagement in decision making. Limited treatment options being offered, overuse of medical terminology, and communication gaps between clinicians and patients were the main challenges described during the information-sharing process. Information that needs persisting after physician-patient consultations resulted in active information-seeking behavior. The key variables identified in this study that potentially affected the decision-making process were future personal considerations, language used to discuss cancer, and negative emotions. Conclusions: These results highlight the necessity of adopting flexible strategies when supporting collaborative treatment decision making in the context of the doctor-patient interaction for low-risk PTC. Based on these findings, clinicians can take measures to enhance the quality of SDM by inquiring about patients' role preferences, providing details of the full range of treatment options, and encouraging patients to share their preferences and concerns relating to possible treatment options.