SynthesisBMJ open2019
The impact of decision aids in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Decision Aids in Hematologic Malignancies: What Are Currently Available and What Are We Missing?The oncologist · 2023Pooled it
- Web-based decision aids for cancer clinical decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Communication in decision aids for stage I-III colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Interventions that Facilitate Shared Decision-Making in Cancers with Active Surveillance as Treatment Option: a Systematic Review of Literature.Current oncology reports · 2020Pooled it
- A Brief Web-Based Person-Centered Care Group Training Program for the Management of Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial in Spain.JMIR medical education · 2025Trial
- Shared decision-making in radiotherapy for rectal cancer - A systematic review.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Review
- Patients' perspectives and the perceptions of healthcare providers in the treatment of early rectal cancer; a qualitative study.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Article
- Serbian National Training Programme for minimally invasive colorectal surgery (LapSerb): short-term clinical outcomes of over 1400 colorectal resections.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Prediction of recovery in trauma patients using Latent Markov models.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Decision aid for prostate cancer screening in Brazil.Revista de saude publica · 2022Article
- Development of a web-based, patient-centered decision aid for oropharyngeal cancer treatment.Oral oncology · 2021Article
- Perceived importance of affective forecasting in cancer treatment decision making.Journal of psychosocial oncologyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOur aim was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine the impact of patient decision aids (PDA) on patients facing treatment decisions for colorectal cancer.
designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: Sources included Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library from inception to June, 20, 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, mixed methods and case series in which a PDA for colorectal cancer treatment was used. Qualitative studies were excluded from our review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Following execution of the search strategy by a medical librarian, two blinded independent reviewers identified articles for inclusion. Two blinded reviewers were also responsible for data extraction, risk of bias and study quality assessments. Any conflict in article inclusion or extraction was resolved by discussion.
resultsOut of 3773 articles identified, three met our inclusion criteria: one RCT, one before-and-after study and one mixed-method study. In these studies, the use of a PDA for colorectal cancer treatment was associated with increased patient knowledge, satisfaction and preparation for making a decision. On quality assessment, two of three studies were judged to be of low quality.
conclusionA paucity of evidence exists on the effect of PDA for colorectal cancer treatment with existing evidence being largely of low quality. Further investigation is required to determine the effect of decision aids for colorectal cancer treatment as well as reasons for the lack of PDA development and implementation in this area. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095153.
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.