Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31043816›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2019

Patient decision aid for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for use in the consultation: a feasibility study.

J E Squires, D Stacey, M Coughlin, M Greenough, A Roberts, K Dorrance, M Clemons, J M Caudrelier, I D Graham, J Zhang and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Systematic Development of Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the IPDAS Collaboration.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

J E SquiresClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
D StaceyClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
M CoughlinClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
M GreenoughSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.
A RobertsBreast Surgical Oncology Unit, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON.
K DorranceClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
M ClemonsCancer Therapeutics Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
J M CaudrelierDepartment of Radiation Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON.
I D GrahamClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON.
J ZhangDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.
M Demery VarinSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.
A ArnaoutBreast Surgical Oncology Unit, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON.
Ottawa Hospital · CAOttawa Hospital Research InstituteUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (cpm) continue to rise internationally despite evidence-based guidance strongly discouraging its use in most women with unilateral breast cancer. The purpose of the present study was to develop and assess the feasibility of a knowledge translation tool [a patient decision aid (da)] designed to enhance evidence-informed shared decision-making about cpm. Methods: A consultation da was developed using the Ottawa Patient Decision Aid Development eTraining in consultation with clinicians and knowledge translation experts. The final da was then assessed for feasibility with health care professionals and patients across Canada. The assessment involved a survey completed online (health care professionals) or by telephone (patients). Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics for closed-ended questions and qualitative content analysis for open-ended questions. Results: The 51 participants who completed the survey included 39 health care professionals and 12 patients. The da was acceptable; 88% of participants viewed it as having the right amount of information or slightly more or less information than they would like. Almost all participants (98%) felt that the da would prepare patients to make better decisions. The aid was perceived to be usable, with 73% of participants stating that they would be willing to use or share the da. Conclusions: The cpm patient da developed for the present study was viewed by health care professionals and patients across Canada to be acceptable and usable during the clinical consultation. It holds promise as a knowledge translation tool to be used by clinicians in consultation with women who have unilateral breast cancer to enhance evidence-informed and shared decision-making with respect to undergoing cpm.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesProphylactic MastectomyAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsDecision MakingFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedOntarioReferral and ConsultationSurveys and QuestionnairesContralateral prophylactic mastectomydecision aidsevidence-informed careshared decision-makingunilateral breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID31043816
PMCPMC6476460
OpenAlexW2943829678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.