ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2020
Evaluation of existing patient educational materials and development of a brochure for women with dense breasts.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating Readability, Understandability, and Actionability of Online Printable Patient Education Materials for Cholesterol Management: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Pooled it
- Psychosocial outcomes and health service use after notifying women participating in population breast screening when they have dense breasts: a BreastScreen Queensland randomised controlled trial.The Medical journal of Australia · 2023Trial
- Australian Women's Intentions and Psychological Outcomes Related to Breast Density Notification and Information: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- Breast Density Knowledge in a Screening Mammography Population Exposed to Density Notification.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2022Article
- Using Mixed Methods With Multiple Stakeholders to Inform Development of a Breast Cancer Screening Decision Aid for Women With Limited Health Literacy.MDM policy & practiceArticle
- The development and evaluation of educational resources for young women with neurofibromatosis type 1 undergoing breast cancer surveillance.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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIn this pilot study, we developed and assessed acceptability of a brochure for women with dense breasts. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe measured Flesch-Kincaid Readability of 22 existing breast density educational materials. We then developed a brochure and tested it in two populations of women: 44 safety net hospital patients and 13 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium stakeholders.
resultsAverage grade score of existing materials was 10.0 (range: 5.5-12.7). Our brochure had a grade score of 5.9, and patients reported it was easy to understand.
conclusionOur plain language brochure could improve patient understanding following mandatory dense breast notification.
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.