Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32511720›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Assessment of Clinician Decision-making on Cancer Screening Cessation in Older Adults With Limited Life Expectancy.

Nancy L Schoenborn, Jacqueline Massare, Reuben Park, Cynthia M Boyd, Youngjee Choi, Craig E Pollack

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Colorectal Cancer Mortality Beginning One Year after a Negative Fecal Occult Blood Test, among Screen-Eligible 76- to 85-Year-Olds.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Colorectal Cancer Mortality Beginning Ten Years after a Negative Colonoscopy, among Screen-Eligible Adults 76 to 85 Years Old.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nancy L SchoenbornDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Jacqueline MassareDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Reuben ParkDepartment of Biology and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Cynthia M BoydDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Youngjee ChoiDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Craig E PollackDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

Patient-Centered Care for Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: Research and Mentoring ProgramK24AG056578 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BOYD, CYNTHIA MELINDA · 2017 to 2021
$1.1M
Improving cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancyK76AG059984 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SCHOENBORN, NANCY · 2018 to 2021
$972k
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG056578NIA NIH HHS K76 AG059984
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Despite clinical practice guidelines recommending against routine cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancy, older adults are still frequently screened for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. Objective: To examine primary care clinicians' decision-making on stopping breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancy. Design, Setting, and Participants: In qualitative interviews coupled with medical record-stimulated recall, clinicians from 17 academic and community clinics affiliated with a large health system were asked how they came to specific cancer screening decisions in 2 or 3 of their older patients with less than 10-year of estimated life expectancy, including patients with and without recent screening. Patients were surveyed by telephone. Data collection occurred between October 2018 and May 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinician interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed with qualitative content analysis to identify major themes. Patient surveys assessed perception of cancer screening decisions, importance of clinician recommendation, and willingness to stop screening. Results: Twenty-five primary care clinicians (mean [SD] age, 47.1 [9.7] years; 14 female [56%]) discussed 53 patients during medical record-stimulated recall, ranging from 2 to 3 patients per clinician; 46 patients and 1 caregiver (mean [SD] age 74.9 [5.4]; 31 female [66%]) participated in the survey. Clinician interviews revealed 5 major themes: (1) cancer screening decisions were not always conscious, deliberate decisions; (2) electronic medical record alerts were connected with less deliberate decision-making; (3) cancer screening was not binary and clinicians often considered other options to scale back screening without actually stopping; (4) in addition to patient characteristics, clinicians were influenced by patient request and anecdotal experiences; and (5) influences outside of the primary care clinician-patient dyad were important, such as from specialists and patients' family or friends. Patient surveys asked approximately 64 cancer screening decisions of 47 patients. Patients did not recall approximately half (31 of 64) of their cancer screening decisions. Among those with recent screening, the mean score for willingness to stop screening was 3.2 (95% CI 2.5-3.9) on a 5-point Likert scale (with 1 indicating "extremely unlikely" and 5 indicating "extremely likely"). In most screening decisions that involved specialists (13 of 16), patients valued specialists' recommendations over those of primary care clinicians. Conclusions and Relevance: Cancer screening decision-making is complex. Study findings suggest that strategies that facilitate more deliberate decision-making may be important in cancer screening of older adults with limited life expectancy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overClinical Decision-MakingEarly Detection of CancerEvaluation Studies as TopicFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicLife ExpectancyMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPhysicians, Primary CarePractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID32511720
PMCPMC7280953
OpenAlexW3033730484

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.