Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32720038›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021

Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences in Relation to Low-Value Services for Older Women with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Nicole Mott, Ton Wang, Jacquelyn Miller, Nicholas L Berlin, Sarah Hawley, Reshma Jagsi, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher, Lesly A Dossett

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Does Messaging for Reducing Breast Cancer Overscreening in Older Women Have Differential Responses among Medical Minimizers and Maximizers?Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicole MottUniversity of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Ton WangDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jacquelyn MillerInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Nicholas L BerlinDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Sarah HawleyInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Reshma JagsiInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Brian J Zikmund-FisherDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Lesly A DossettDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. ldossett@umich.edu.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USCenter for Practical Bioethics · US

Funding

XenograftP30CA046592 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI THEODORE S LAWRENCE · 1988 to 2026
$178.2M
University of Michigan Surgical Oncology Research Training ProgramT32CA009672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI JACQUELINE SARA JERUSS, WEIPING ZOU · 1991 to 2026
$6.0M
Error Identification Between Health Systems—A Patient Safety Blind SpotK08HS026030 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DOSSETT, LESLY A · 2018 to 2021
$604k
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality AHRQ; 5 K08 HS026030-02AHRQ HHS K08 HS026030NCI NIH HHS NCI; T32 CA009672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046592NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009672University of Michigan, Rogel Cancer Center NCI; T32 CA009672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiple studies have demonstrated the safety of omitting therapies in older women with breast cancer. Despite de-implementation guidelines, up to 65% of older women continue to receive one or more of these low-value services. Previous work has investigated the role of both provider and patient attitudes as barriers to de-implementation; however, the importance of the patient's maximizing-minimizing preferences within this context remains unclear.

methodsIn this qualitative study, we conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with women ≥ 70 years of age without a previous diagnosis of breast cancer to elicit perspectives on breast cancer treatment in relation to their medical maximizing-minimizing preferences, as determined by the single-item maximizer-minimizer elicitation question (MM1). We used an interpretive description approach in analysis to produce a thematic survey.

resultsParticipants were relatively evenly distributed across the MM1 (minimizer, n = 8; neutral, n = 13; maximizer, n = 9). Despite being told of recommendations allowing for the safe omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy and post-lumpectomy radiotherapy, maximizers consistently stated preferences for more medical intervention and aggressive therapies over minimizers and neutral individuals.

conclusionMedical maximizing-minimizing preferences in older women correspond with preferences for breast cancer treatment options that guidelines identify as potentially unnecessary. Increased awareness of patient-level variability in maximizing-minimizing preferences may be valuable in developing optimal intervention strategies to reduce utilization of low-value care.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHormonesHumansMastectomy, SegmentalSentinel Lymph Node BiopsySurveys and QuestionnairesHormones

Identifiers

PMID32720038
PMCPMC7855372
OpenAlexW3045466569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.