Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2003
A randomized trial of three videos that differ in the framing of information about mammography in women 40 to 49 years old.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in women aged 40-74 years who are not at increased risk for breast cancer.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2018Guideline
- Use of patient decision aids increased younger women's reluctance to begin screening mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Framing of health information messages.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- A systematic review of information in decision aids.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2007Pooled it
- Using an informed consent in mammography screening: a randomized trial.Cancer medicine · 2015Trial
- What is lacking in current decision aids on cancer screening?CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2013Review
- Informed decision making before initiating screening mammography: does it occur and does it make a difference?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effect of providing structured information about the benefits and harms of mammography in differing frames on women's perceptions of screening.
designRandomized control trial.
settingGeneral internal medicine academic practice.
participantsOne hundred seventy-nine women aged 35 through 49.
interventionWomen received 1 of 3 5-minute videos about the benefits and harms of screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49. These videos differed only in the way the probabilities of potential outcomes were framed (positive, neutral, or negative). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsWe measured the change in accurate responses to questions about potential benefits and harms of mammography, and the change in the proportion of participants who perceived that the benefits of mammography were more important than the harms. Before seeing the videos, women's knowledge about the benefits and harms of mammography was inaccurate (82% responded incorrectly to all 3 knowledge questions). After seeing the videos, the proportion that answered correctly increased by 52%, 43%, and 30% for the 3 knowledge questions, respectively, but there were no differences between video frames. At baseline, most women thought the benefits of mammography outweighed the harms (79% positive frame, 80% neutral frame, and 85% negative frame). After the videos, these proportions were similar among the 3 groups (84%, 81%, 83%, P =.93).
conclusionsWomen improved the accuracy of their responses to questions about the benefits and harms of mammography after seeing the videos, but this change was not affected by the framing of information. Women strongly perceived that the benefits of mammography outweighed the harms, and providing accurate information had no effect on these perceptions, regardless of how it was framed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.