Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33637391›Full record

ArticlePatient education and counseling2021

Evaluation of a mammography decision aid for women 75 and older at risk for lower health literacy in a pretest-posttest trial.

Tamara Cadet, Gianna Aliberti, Maria Karamourtopoulos, Alicia Jacobson, Elizabeth A Gilliam, Sara Primeau, Roger Davis, Mara A Schonberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient education and counseling, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Tamara CadetSimmons University College of Social Sciences and Policy Practice, School of Social Work, 300 The Fenway, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: Tamara.cadet@simmons.edu.
Gianna AlibertiBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.
Maria KaramourtopoulosBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.
Alicia JacobsonBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.
Elizabeth A GilliamBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.
Sara PrimeauCambridge Health Alliance, 1493 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Roger DavisBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.
Mara A SchonbergBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1309 Beacon St, Ste 202, Brookline, MA, USA.

Funding

Randomized Trial of a Mammography Decision Aid for Women Aged 75 and OlderR01CA181357 · NCI · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI SCHONBERG, MARA A · 2014 to 2018
$2.9M
Research and mentoring program in shared decision making in the care of older adultsK24AG071906 · NIA · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI SCHONBERG, MARA A · 2021 to 2025
$946k
Shared decision-making and colorectal cancer screening behaviors among older adults with low health literacyK23AG062795 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CADET, TAMARA J. · 2020 to 2024
$634k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA181357NIA NIH HHS K23 AG062795NIA NIH HHS K24 AG071906NIMHD NIH HHS L60 MD009949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe evaluation of the effect of a mammography decision aid (DA) designed for older women at risk for lower health literacy (LHL) on their knowledge of mammography's benefits and harms and decisional conflict.

methodsUsing a pretest-posttest design, women > 75 years at risk for LHL reviewing a mammography DA before and after their [B] primary care provider visit. Women were recruited from an academic medical center and community health centers and clinics.

resultsOf 147 eligible women approached, 43 participated. Receipt of the DA significantly affected knowledge of mammography's benefits and harms [B] (pre-test (M = 3.75, SD = 1.05) to post-test (M = 4.42, SD = 1.19), p = .03). Receipt of the DA did not significantly affect decisional conflict (pre-test (M = 3.10, SD = .97) to post-test (M = 3.23, SD = 1.02), p = .71, higher scores = lower decisional conflict). The majority of the women (97%) indicated that the DA was helpful.

conclusionsWomen found a mammography screening DA helpful and its use was associated with these women having increased knowledge of mammography's benefits and harms. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: With the shift toward shared decision-making for women > 75 years, there is a need to engage women of all literacy levels to participate in these decisions and have tools such as the one tested in this study.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyAgedDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyHealth literacyMammography decision aidOlder womenScreening

Identifiers

PMID33637391
PMCPMC8364563

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.