ArticleJMIR formative research2018
The iPrevent Online Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Risk Management Tool: Usability and Acceptability Testing.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- iKNOW-Supporting the counseling of women with hereditary risk of breast and ovarian cancer with digital technologies: A randomized controlled trial.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Perceptions and Usability of PREVENTION: A Breast Cancer Risk Assessment e-Platform.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Workload and workflow implications associated with the use of electronic clinical decision support tools used by health professionals in general practice: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- A Machine-Learning-Based Risk-Prediction Tool for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections Acquisition over the Next 12 Months.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Review
- An Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Pipeline for Medical Domain: Malaysian Breast Cancer Survivorship Cohort as a Case Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Long-Term Evaluation of Women Referred to a Breast Cancer Family History Clinic (Manchester UK 1987-2020).Cancers · 2020Article
- Key steps for effective breast cancer prevention.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2020Review
- Accuracy of Risk Estimates from the iPrevent Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Management Tool.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2019Article
- Acceptability of breast cancer risk assessment amongst general population women aged 30-39 years: A qualitative study.Women's health (London, England)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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundiPrevent estimates breast cancer (BC) risk and provides tailored risk management information.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the usability and acceptability of the iPrevent prototype.
methodsClinicians were eligible for participation in the study if they worked in primary care, breast surgery, or genetics clinics. Female patients aged 18-70 years with no personal cancer history were eligible. Clinicians were first familiarized with iPrevent using hypothetical paper-based cases and then actor scenarios; subsequently, they used iPrevent with their patients. Clinicians and patients completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) and an Acceptability questionnaire 2 weeks after using iPrevent; patients also completed measures of BC worry, anxiety, risk perception, and knowledge pre- and 2 weeks post-iPrevent. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.
resultsThe SUS and Acceptability questionnaires were completed by 19 of 20 clinicians and 37 of 43 patients. Usability was above average (SUS score >68) for 68% (13/19) clinicians and 76% (28/37) patients. The amount of information provided by iPrevent was reported as "about right" by 89% (17/19) clinicians and 89% (33/37) patients and 95% (18/19) and 97% (36/37), respectively, would recommend iPrevent to others, although 53% (10/19) clinicians and 27% (10/37) patients found it too long. Exploratory analyses suggested that iPrevent could improve risk perception, decrease frequency of BC worry, and enhance BC prevention knowledge without changing state anxiety.
conclusionsThe iPrevent prototype demonstrated good usability and acceptability. Because concerns about length could be an implementation barrier, data entry has been abbreviated in the publicly available version of iPrevent.
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.