Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26360918›Full record

ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2015

Mammography Decision Aid Reduces Decisional Conflict for Women in Their Forties Considering Screening.

Karen B Eden, Paula Scariati, Krystal Klein, Lindsey Watson, Mark Remiker, Michelle Hribar, Vanessa Forro, LeAnn Michaels, Heidi D Nelson

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Karen B Eden1 Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Paula Scariati2 Marin General Hospital , Greenbrae, California.
Krystal Klein1 Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Lindsey Watson1 Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Mark Remiker3 Oregon Rural Practice-Based Research Network, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Michelle Hribar1 Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Vanessa Forro3 Oregon Rural Practice-Based Research Network, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
LeAnn Michaels3 Oregon Rural Practice-Based Research Network, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.
Heidi D Nelson1 Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon.

Funding

Oregon Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR000128 · NCATS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI ELLISON, DAVID H · 2012 to 2015
$28.7M
TRAINING PROGRAM IN HEALTH INFORMATICST15LM007088 · NLM · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAM R HERSH, Vishnu Mohan · 1992 to 2026
$23.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000128NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007088NLM NIH HHS T15LM007088
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical guidelines recommend a personalized approach to mammography screening for women in their forties; however, methods to do so are lacking. An evidence-based mammography screening decision aid was developed as an electronic mobile application and evaluated in a before-after study.

methodsThe decision aid (Mammopad) included modules on breast cancer, mammography, risk assessment, and priority setting about screening. Women aged 40-49 years who were patients of rural primary care clinics, had no major risk factors for breast cancer, and no mammography during the previous year were invited to use the decision aid. Twenty women participated in pretesting of the decision aid and 75 additional women completed the before-after study. The primary outcome was decisional conflict measured before and after using Mammopad. Secondary outcomes included decision self-efficacy and intention to begin or continue mammography screening. Differences comparing measures before versus after use were determined using Wilcoxon signed rank tests.

resultsAfter using Mammopad, women reported reduced decisional conflict based on mean Decisional Conflict Scale scores overall (46.33 versus 8.33; Z = -7.225; p < 0.001) and on all subscales (p < 0.001). Women also reported increased mean Decision Self-Efficacy Scale scores (79.67 versus 95.73; Z = 6.816, p < 0.001). Although 19% of women changed their screening intentions, this was not statistically significant.

conclusionsWomen reported less conflict about their decisions for mammography screening, and felt more confident to make decisions after using Mammopad. This approach may help guide women through the decision making process to determine personalized screening choices that are appropriate for them.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesEarly Detection of CancerMammographyPatient ParticipationAdultBreast NeoplasmsConflict, PsychologicalDecision MakingFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansIntentionMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID26360918
PMCPMC4683542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.