ArticleBMJ open2018
How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 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
- Citizens' Jury as a Strategy to Increase Social Participation Among Older People.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Article
- Public Engagement in Health Policy-Making for Older Adults: A Systematic Search and Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- IMPAACT: IMproving the PArticipAtion of older people in policy decision-making on common health CondiTions - a study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Layperson Views about the Design and Evaluation of Decision Aids: A Public Deliberation.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Article
- Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople.PloS one · 2021Article
- An Australian community jury to consider case-finding for dementia: Differences between informed community preferences and general practice guidelines.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Article
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
objectivesTo verify whether a citizens' jury study is feasible to the Andalusian population and to know if women, when better informed, are able to answer the research question of whether the Andalusian Public Health System must continue offering screening mammography to women aged 50-69. The reasons for the pertinent decision and recommendations to the political authorities will be stated.
designQualitative research study with the methodology of citizens' jury.
settingBreast cancer screening programme in Andalusia (Spain).
participantsThirteen women aged 50-69 with secondary school or higher education accepted to participate as a jury. Two epidemiologists were the expert witnesses. The main researcher was the neutral moderator.
interventionsJury met on Monday, 15 February 2016. The moderator indicated to the jury that it had to assess the screening programme's key benefits and main harm. On Tuesday, 16 February, the expert witnesses positioned for and against the programme. On Thursday, 18 February, the jury deliberated, reached final conclusions, submitted its vote and stated its recommendations to politicians. The deliberation session was transcribed and analysed with the support of ATLAS.ti.5.2 software. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility in the Andalusian population, women's vote and opinion, reasons for votes and recommendations to political authorities.
resultsEleven participants voted yes and two voted no. There are three reasons to vote 'yes': health, the test nature, and individual freedom. Some women invoke the lack of efficacy and the cost to justify their negative vote, at least in universal terms. On completion, they made suggestions to be submitted to the pertinent authorities for the improvement of information, psychology services and research.
conclusionsThe deliberative strategy is feasible and causes a favourable positioning regarding screening mammography, although information changes the opinion of some women, who desire informed decision making and to keep or increase medicalisation in their lives.
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.