SynthesisBMJ open2017
Assessment of the effects of decision aids about breast cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 6 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Online Interactive Decision Tools on Women's Decision-Making Regarding Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Factors associated with attendance at screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Web-based decision aids for cancer clinical decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of Chronic Exercise Training on Blood Lactate Metabolism Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review on women's values and preferences concerning breast cancer screening and diagnostic services.Psycho-oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Informing Women About Overdetection in Breast Cancer Screening: Two-Year Outcomes From a Randomized Trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Trial
- Effect of an information leaflet on breast cancer screening participation: A cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- Effect of information about the benefits and harms of mammography on women's decision making: The InforMa randomised controlled trial.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Cancer-Screening Decision Making: An Overview of Reviews.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Review
- Would shared decision-making be useful in breast cancer screening programmes? A qualitative study using focus group discussions to gather evidence from French women with different socioeconomic backgrounds.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Men's Perception of Being Invited for Prostate Cancer Testing and the Information About Its Pros and Cons-A Survey from Two Population-based Testing Programmes.European urology open science · 2023Article
- To Consent or Not to Consent to Screening, That Is the Question.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Racial differences in prevention decision making among U.S. women at high risk of breast cancer: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of a decision aid on mammography screening uptake: study protocol.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Team Science Principles Enhance Cancer Care Delivery Quality Improvement: Interdisciplinary Implementation of Breast Cancer Screening Shared Decision Making.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Mammography and Decision Aid Use for Breast Cancer Screening in Older Women.American journal of preventive medicine · 2022Article
- Leveraging the timing and frequency of patient decision aids in longitudinal shared decision-making: A narrative review and applied model.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies is to assess the effect of decision aids (DAs) in women aged 50 and below facing the decision to be screened for breast cancer.
settingScreening for breast cancer.
interventionDAs aimed to help women make a deliberative choice regarding participation in mammography screening by providing information on the options and outcomes. ELIGIBLE STUDIES: We included published original, non-pilot, studies that assess the effect of DAs for breast cancer screening. We excluded the studies that evaluated only participation intention or actual uptake. The studies' risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCTs and the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for non-RCTs. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The main outcome measures were informed choice, decisional conflict and/or confidence, and knowledge. Secondary outcomes were values, attitudes, uncertainty and intention to be screened.
resultsA total of 607 studies were identified, but only 3 RCTs and 1 before-after study were selected. The use of DAs increased the proportion of women making an informed decision by 14%, 95% CI (2% to 27%) and the proportion of women with adequate knowledge by 12%, 95% CI (7% to 16%). We observed heterogeneity among the studies in confidence in the decision. The meta-analysis of the RCTs showed a significant decrease in confidence in the decision and in intention to be screened.
conclusionsTools to aid decision making in screening for breast cancer improve knowledge and promote informed decision; however, we found divergent results on decisional conflict and confidence in the decision. Under the current paradigm change, which favours informed choice rather than maximising uptake, more research is necessary for the improvement of DAs.
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.