Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33188612›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021

Use of decision aid to improve informed decision-making and communication with physicians on the use of oral complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among cancer patients on chemotherapy treatment: a randomised controlled trial.

Wan-Qin Chong, Maria Jannet Mogro, Asrie Arsad, Bee-Choo Tai, Soo-Chin Lee

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Wan-Qin ChongDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, 1E Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore. wan_qin_chong@nuhs.edu.sg.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4012-6858
Maria Jannet MogroDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, 1E Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Asrie ArsadDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Bee-Choo TaiSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Soo-Chin LeeDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, 1E Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
National University Cancer Institute, Singapore · SGNational University Hospital · SGNational University of Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is often used by cancer patients and is concerning as concomitant oral CAM and chemotherapy use may result in adverse interactions and toxicities. We hypothesise that a decision aid (DA) may promote informed and rational use of oral CAM during chemotherapy, and increase patients' discussion with their oncologists on CAM use.

methodsWe randomised 240 patients initiating chemotherapy to receive DA or none. Questionnaires were administered at randomisation (visit 1), 1 month (visit 2) and 3 months (visit 3). The primary endpoint was the decisional conflict score (DCS) for decision made on CAM use during chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints include patients' decision regret score (DRS) on CAM use, CAM uptake, discussion with oncologists on CAM usage, and difference in quality of life (QoL) score between CAM and non-CAM users at visit 3.

resultsThere was no difference in the mean DCS (mean difference 2.7 [95 CI - 2.9 to 8.3, p = 0.345]) and DRS (mean difference - 0.3 [95% CI - 6.3 to 5.8, p = 0.926]) between the two arms. There was a reduction in odds of CAM usage in the intervention arm compared to control arm (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.78, p = 0.009), but there was no difference in discussion with oncologists on CAM usage (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.01, p = 0.419), or in the QoL between CAM and non-CAM users.

conclusionOur DA did not reduce DCS among cancer patients on chemotherapy. DA that provides more evidence-based information on CAM, and non-judgemental discussion initiated by oncologists to discuss CAM, may improve its effectiveness.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAdultAgedCommunicationComplementary TherapiesDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPhysiciansProspective StudiesQuality of LifeYoung AdultComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM)Decision aidQuality of life (QoL)Supportive care

Identifiers

PMID33188612
OpenAlexW3100911817

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.