Trial reportTrials2015
Informed shared decision-making supported by decision coaches for women with ductal carcinoma in situ: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Communicating prognosis to women with early breast cancer - overview of prediction tools and the development and pilot testing of a decision aid.BMC health services research · 2019Pooled it
- Communication skills training for healthcare professionals working with people who have cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Measuring readiness for nurse-led shared decision making in clinical practice: development and first testing of the RSDM-N scale.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Pioneering the IBD specialist nurse role in China: a shared decision-making model for clinical practice innovation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Understanding how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions: a realist review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Review
- Prediction Models and Decision Aids for Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Systematic Literature Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- Article
- Article
- Implementation of shared decision-making in oncology: development and pilot study of a nurse-led decision-coaching programme for women with ductal carcinoma in situ.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
- Common methods of measuring 'informed choice' in screening participation: Challenges and future directions.Preventive medicine reports · 2016Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen with breast cancer want to participate in treatment decision-making. Guidelines have confirmed the right of informed shared decision-making. However, previous research has shown that the implementation of informed shared decision-making is suboptimal for reasons of limited resources of physicians, power imbalances between patients and physicians and missing evidence-based patient information. We developed an informed shared decision-making program for women with primary ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The program provides decision coaching for women by specialized nurses and aims at supporting involvement in decision-making and informed choices. In this trial, the informed shared decision-making program will be evaluated in breast care centers. METHODS/
designA cluster randomized controlled trial will be conducted to compare the informed shared decision-making program with standard care. The program comprises an evidence-based patient decision aid and training of physicians (2 hours) and specialized breast care and oncology nurses (4 days) in informed shared decision-making. Sixteen certified breast care centers will be included, with 192 women with primary DCIS being recruited. Primary outcome is the extent of patients' involvement in shared decision-making as assessed by the MAPPIN-Odyad (Multifocal approach to the 'sharing' in shared decision-making: observer instrument dyad). Secondary endpoints include the sub-measures of the MAPPIN-inventory (MAPPIN-Onurse, MAPPIN-Ophysician, MAPPIN-Opatient, MAPPIN-Qnurse, MAPPIN-Qpatient and MAPPIN-Qphysician), informed choice, decisional conflict and the duration of encounters. It is expected that decision coaching and the provision of evidence-based patient decision aids will increase patients' involvement in decision-making with informed choices and reduce decisional conflicts and duration of physician encounters. Furthermore, an accompanying process evaluation will be conducted. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the implementation of decision coaches in German breast care centers.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN46305518 , date of registration: 5 June 2015.
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.