Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31377704›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Communicating benign biopsy results by telephone in the NHS Breast Screening Programme: a protocol for a cluster randomised crossover trial.

Sian Zena Williamson, Rebecca Johnson, Harbinder Kaur Sandhu, Nicholas Parsons, Jacquie Jenkins, Margaret Casey, Olive Kearins, Sian Taylor-Phillips

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Sian Zena WilliamsonDepartment of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Rebecca JohnsonFaculty of Health & Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Harbinder Kaur SandhuClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Nicholas ParsonsStatistics and Epidemiology, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Jacquie JenkinsNational Programme Manager-NHS Breast Screening Programme, Public Health England, Sheffield, UK.
Margaret CaseyClinical Nurse Specialist Breast Care, Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK.
Olive KearinsNational Lead Breast Screening QA, Public Health England, Birmingham, UK.
Sian Taylor-PhillipsPopulation Evidence and Technologies, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK s.taylor-phillips@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1841-4346

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOne of the main harms from breast cancer screening is the anxiety caused by false positive results. Various factors may be associated with false-positive anxiety. One modifiable factor may be the method of communication used to deliver results. The aim of this study is to measure the effect on anxiety of receiving benign biopsy results in-person or by telephone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multi-centre cluster randomised crossover trial in the English National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) involving repeated survey measures at four time points. Participants will be women of screening age who have a biopsy following a suspicious mammography result, who ultimately receive a benign or normal (B1) result. Centres will trial both telephone and in-person results on a month-by-month basis, being randomised to which communication method will be trialled first. Women will be blinded to the method of communication they will receive. The analysis will compare women who have received telephone results and women who have received in-person results. The primary outcome measure will be anxiety (measured by the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire) after receiving results, while controlling for baseline anxiety. Secondary outcome measures will include anxiety at 3 and 6 months post-results, understanding of results and patient preferences for how results are communicated. Qualitative telephone interviews will also be conducted to further explore women's reasons for communication preferences. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated after initial separate analysis using the pillar integration process. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Public Health England Breast Screening Programme Research Advisory Committee, (BSPRAC_0013, ODR1718_040) and the National Health Service Health Research Authority (HRA) West Midlands-Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee (17/WM/0313). The findings from this study will be disseminated to key stakeholders within the NHSBSP and via academic publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN36997684 TRIAL SPONSOR: This research is part of a PhD award and is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council Doctoral Training Centre at the University of Warwick and Public Health England. The sponsor for this research is Jane Prewett (sponsorship@warwick.ac.uk).

Indexed as

DisclosureTelephoneAgedAnxietyBiopsyBreastBreast NeoplasmsCross-Over StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEnglandFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicState Medicinecancer screeningcommunication

Identifiers

PMID31377704
PMCPMC6687008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.