ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Breast Cancer Care Quality Indicators in Spain: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- IDECIDE breast surgery patient decision aid: Development and testing of a quality of life-integrated decision support tool.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Attitudes and Perspectives on Shared Decision Making Among Breast Surgical Oncologists: A Qualitative Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial-Intelligence Cloud-Based Platform to Support Shared Decision-Making in the Locoregional Treatment of Breast Cancer: Protocol for a Multidimensional Evaluation Embedded in the CINDERELLA Clinical Trial.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Article
- Patient experiences and needs in cancer care- results from a nationwide cross-sectional study in Germany.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- The factors involved in surgical decision-making in younger women diagnosed with breast cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand: A qualitative analysis.Journal of health psychology · 2024Article
- Experiences of Indonesian women with breast cancer underwent treatment decision-making: A qualitative study.Belitung nursing journal · 2024Article
- Towards Agility in Breast Cancer Treatment Principles as Adopted from Agile Software Engineering.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Implications of Agile Values in Software Engineering for Agility in Breast Cancer Treatment: Protocol for a Comparative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Implementing shared decision making for early-stage breast cancer treatment using a coproduction learning collaborative: the SHAIR Collaborative protocol.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Determining the Development Strategy and Suited Adoption Paths for the Core Competence of Shared Decision-Making Tasks through the SAA-NRM Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
- Evidence on Patient Decision Aids and Shared Decision-Making Across Breast Centers in Europe: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
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
objectivesTo assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale.
resultsThe participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36-4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51-4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37-3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88-4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients' paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%).
conclusionsNew policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.
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.