ArticleBMJ open2022
Development of support material for health professionals who are implementing Shared Decision-making in breast cancer screening: validation using the Delphi technique.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development-centred neonatal care: validation study of the patient safety checklist.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening.Cancers · 2023Review
- Implementation of Shared Decision-Making Within Internet Hospitals in China Based on Patients' Needs: Feasibility Study and Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Establishment of an indicator framework for the transmission risk of the mountain-type zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis based on the Delphi-entropy weight method.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Literature is no report support material on Shared Decision-making applied to breast cancer screening that is intended for Spanish health professionals. The researcher created both a handbook and a guide for this topic using an adaption of the Three-talk model.
objectiveA Delphi method will be used to reach an agreement among experts on the contents and design of a manual and guide, designed by the research team, and to be used by health professionals in the application of SDM in breast cancer screening.
designA qualitative study. The content and design of the handbook and the guide was discussed by 20 experts. The Delphi techniques was in an online mode between July and October 2020 and researchers used Google forms in three rounds with open and closed questions. The criterion established for consensus was a coefficient of concordance (Cc) above 75, for questions using a Likert scale of 1-6-in which 1 meant 'completely disagree' and 6 'completely agree'-with a cut-off point equal to or higher than 4.
resultsParticipants considered the Three-talk model suitable for the screening context. The handbook sections and level of detail were considered satisfactory (Cc=90). The summary provided by the clinical practice guide was considered necessary (Cc=75), as it was the self-assessment tool for professionals (Cc=85). Content was added: addressing the limitations of the SDM model; extending the number of sample dialogues for health professionals; providing supplementary resources on using Patient Decisions aids and adding references on communication skills. CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS: The first handbook and clinical practice guide providing unique SDM support material for health professionals have been developed. The handbook and guide are useful and innovative as supporting material for health professionals, but training strategies for SDM and a piloting plan for the use of materials are requested, in order to facilitate its implementation.
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.