SynthesisHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2020
Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.
Synthesis in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 5 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Gender bias in shared decision-making among cancer care guidelines: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- A comprehensive systematic review of colorectal cancer screening clinical practices guidelines and consensus statements.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of shared decision-making in guidelines about colorectal cancer screening.European journal of cancer care · 2022Pooled it
- Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Pooled it
- Quality in aesthetic medicine and surgery: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia)Pooled it
- Shared decision-making in Cervical Cancer Care at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Shared decision-making for early-stage breast cancer treatment: An evolutionary concept analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- The Implementation of Shared Decision-Making Using Patient Decision Aid Tools to Select Breast Cancer Treatment Options: A Systematic Review in the Time of Minimum Quality Standards.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Assessing TDApp: An AI-based clinical decision support system for ADHD treatment recommendations.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Fostering Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Health Care Professionals in Clinical Practice Guidelines: Protocol for a Project to Develop and Test a Tool for Guideline Developers.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Training Undergraduate Medical Students in Shared Decision Making: A Systematic Review.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Review
- Integrated Electronic Health Record of Multidisciplinary Professionals Throughout the Cancer Care Pathway: A Pilot Study Exploring Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Patients.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Patient Preferences Influencing Treatment Decision-Making in Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Germany, Italy, and Japan.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Implementing shared decision-making interventions in breast cancer clinical practice: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- The Role of Nurse on the Treatment Decision Support for Older People with Cancer: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Definition of a tool to assess shared decision-making (SDM) on women with breast cancer: A value-based approach.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- A quality evaluation of the clinical practice guidelines on breast cancer using the RIGHT checklist.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is not clear whether clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are adequately promoting shared decision making (SDM).
objectiveTo evaluate the recommendations about SDM in CPGs and CSs concerning breast cancer (BC) treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: Following protocol registration (Prospero no.: CRD42018106643), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2010 to December 2019. INCLUSION CRITERIA: CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were selected whether published in a journal or in an online document. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was developed and used to extract data in duplicate. MAIN
resultsThere were 167 relevant CPGs (139) and CSs (28); SDM was reported in only 40% of the studies. SDM was reported more often in recent publications after 2015 (42/101 (41.6 %) vs 46/66 (69.7 %), P = .0003) but less often in medical journal publications (44/101 (43.5 %) vs 17/66 (25.7 %), P = .009). In CPGs and CSs with SDM, only 8/66 (12%) met one-fifth (6 of 31) of the quality items; only 14/66 (8%) provided clear and precise SDM recommendations. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsSDM descriptions and recommendations in CPGs and CSs concerning BC treatment need improvement. SDM was more frequently reported in CPGs and CSs in recent years, but surprisingly it was less often covered in medical journals, a feature that needs attention.
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.