ArticleJournal of patient-centered research and reviews2018
'No Pink Ribbons': How Women's Lived Experiences With Breast Atypia Inform Decisions Involving Risk-Reducing Medications.
Article in Journal of patient-centered research and reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncertainty and Competing Priorities in Shared Clinical Decision-Making.Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAtypical hyperplasia (AH) is associated with a nearly 4-fold elevation of lifetime risk for breast cancer, and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is associated with a 7- to 8-fold risk. Women with AH/LCIS make numerous decisions in the course of treatment, including whether to take a risk-reducing medication, an option relatively few women pursue. We explored women's decision-making processes through patient narratives in an effort to inform decision supports for AH/LCIS.
methodsWe conducted in-depth interviews with 20 English-speaking women with AH/LCIS and no subsequent diagnosis of invasive breast cancer who had enrolled in the Rays of Hope Center for Breast Cancer Research patient registry between April 5, 2012, and March 31, 2016. Interviews were audiotaped, professionally transcribed, and qualitatively analyzed using thematic qualitative content analysis.
resultsWe identified three major narrative themes: 1) experiences with medical care; 2) decision-making; and 3) making sense of AH/LCIS. Each major theme had several subthemes, many of which map onto existing decisional theories and heuristics. Subthemes included the impact of life context on diagnosis meaning, emotional responses, changes in self-concept and body image, and understanding of the risk-benefit of risk-reducing medications.
conclusionsThis narrative analysis offers important insights into how lived experience may influence decision-making for women with AH/LCIS. Decision supports that focus not only on analytic decisional processes, but also patients' subjectivities and decisional heuristics, could prove useful for women and their health care providers.
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.