Trial reportJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2018
Improving Breast Cancer Surgical Treatment Decision Making: The iCanDecide Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Feasibility and Efficacy of Decision Aids to Improve Decision-Making for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- A randomized controlled trial of shared decision-making treatment planning process to enhance shared decision-making in patients with MBC.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Trial
- Effects of a smartphone application named "Shared Decision Making Assistant" for informed patients with primary liver cancer in decision-making in China: a quasi-experimental study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Trial
- Improving the delivery of team-based survivorship care after primary breast cancer treatment through a multi-level intervention: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Trial
- Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: cluster randomized trial of two decision support interventions for older women with operable breast cancer on quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choices.The British journal of surgery · 2021Trial
- Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2019Trial
- Effectiveness of decision aids on decisional conflict and treatment or disease knowledge among women diagnosed with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Ovarian function suppression decision-making and uptake in premenopausal women with breast cancer: a mixed methods analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Great Debate: Does Breast-Conserving Surgery with Radiotherapy Offer Better Survival than Mastectomy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer?Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Leveraging Digital Twins for Stratification of Patients with Breast Cancer and Treatment Optimization in Geriatric Oncology: Multivariate Clustering Analysis.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- The Implementation of Shared Decision-Making Using Patient Decision Aid Tools to Select Breast Cancer Treatment Options: A Systematic Review in the Time of Minimum Quality Standards.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Using a behaviour-change approach to support uptake of population genomic screening and management options for breast or prostate cancer.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Patient Interest in Exploring Nonsurgical Treatment Approaches for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Characterizing informational needs and information seeking behavior of patients with breast cancer.American journal of surgery · 2024Article
- Does a brief surgeon training in negotiation theory principles decrease rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy?Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Digital Health Interventions for Adult Patients With Cancer Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose This study was conducted to determine the effect of iCanDecide, an interactive and tailored breast cancer treatment decision tool, on the rate of high-quality patient decisions-both informed and values concordant-regarding locoregional breast cancer treatment and on patient appraisal of decision making. Methods We conducted a randomized clinical trial of newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer making locoregional treatment decisions. From 22 surgical practices, 537 patients were recruited and randomly assigned online to the iCanDecide interactive and tailored Web site (intervention) or the iCanDecide static Web site (control). Participants completed a baseline survey and were mailed a follow-up survey 4 to 5 weeks after enrollment to assess the primary outcome of a high-quality decision, which consisted of two components, high knowledge and values-concordant treatment, and secondary outcomes (decision preparation, deliberation, and subjective decision quality). Results Patients in the intervention arm had higher odds of making a high-quality decision than did those in the control arm (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.92; P = .0004), which was driven primarily by differences in the rates of high knowledge between groups. The majority of patients in both arms made values-concordant treatment decisions (78.6% in the intervention arm and 81.4% in the control arm). More patients in the intervention arm had high decision preparation (estimate, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34; P = .027), but there were no significant differences in the other decision appraisal outcomes. The effect of the intervention was similar for women who were leaning strongly toward a treatment option at enrollment compared with those who were not. Conclusion The tailored and interactive iCanDecide Web site, which focused on knowledge building and values clarification, positively affected high-quality decisions largely by improving knowledge compared with static online information. To be effective, future patient-facing decision tools should be integrated into the clinical workflow to improve decision making.
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.