Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35679576›Full record

Trial reportCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2022

Patient and Provider Web-Based Decision Support for Breast Cancer Chemoprevention: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Katherine D Crew, Gauri Bhatkhande, Thomas Silverman, Jacquelyn Amenta, Tarsha Jones, Julia E McGuinness, Jennie Mata, Ashlee Guzman, Ting He, Jill Dimond and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. User Comprehension and EHR Integration of theAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors.

Katherine D CrewDepartment of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-9637-2962
Gauri BhatkhandeDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-7972-9598
Thomas SilvermanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-3879-4104
Jacquelyn AmentaDepartment of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-3039-1386
Tarsha JonesChristine E. Lynn College of Nursing, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida.ORCID 0000-0003-2118-5780
Julia E McGuinnessDepartment of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-5292-1440
Jennie MataDepartment of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-5997-4537
Ashlee GuzmanDepartment of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-9388-4797
Ting HeDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Data Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0002-5055-0399
Jill DimondSassafras Collective, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0002-8482-8061
Wei-Yann TsaiHerbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-5832-1400
Rita KukafkaHerbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-0960-7576

Funding

Tumor Biology and Microenvironment ProgramP30CA013696 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Anil K Rustgi · 1985 to 2026
$115.3M
Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000040 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GINSBERG, HENRY N · 2012 to 2015
$26.2M
Increasing breast cancer chemoprevention in the primary care settingR01CA177995 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CREW, KATHERINE D, KUKAFKA, RITA · 2014 to 2018
$3.5M
Multicenter trial of decision support for breast cancer chemopreventionR01CA226060 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CREW, KATHERINE D, KUKAFKA, RITA · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
Decision Support for Multigene Panel Testing and Family Risk Communication among Racially/Ethnically Diverse Young Breast Cancer SurvivorsK01CA241393 · NCI · FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY · PI JONES, TARSHA · 2021 to 2025
$773k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000040NCI NIH HHS K01 CA241393NCI NIH HHS P30 CA013696NCI NIH HHS R01 CA177995NCI NIH HHS R01 CA226060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant underutilization of breast cancer chemoprevention remains, despite guidelines stating that physicians should recommend chemoprevention with antiestrogen therapy to high-risk women. We randomized women, ages 35 to 75 years, who met high-risk criteria for breast cancer, without a personal history of breast cancer or prior chemoprevention use, to standard educational materials alone or combined with a web-based decision aid. All healthcare providers, including primary care providers and breast specialists, were given access to a web-based decision support tool. The primary endpoint was chemoprevention uptake at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included decision antecedents (perceived breast cancer risk/worry, chemoprevention knowledge, self-efficacy) and decision quality (decision conflict, chemoprevention informed choice) based upon patient surveys administered at baseline, 1 and 6 months after randomization. Among 282 evaluable high-risk women enrolled from November 2016 to March 2020, mean age was 57 years (SD, 9.9) and mean 5-year invasive breast cancer risk was 2.98% (SD, 1.42). There was no significant difference in chemoprevention uptake at 6 months between the intervention and control groups (2.1% vs. 3.5%). Comparing the intervention and control arms at 1 month, there were significant differences among high-risk women in accurate breast cancer risk perceptions (56% vs. 39%, P = 0.017), adequate chemoprevention knowledge (49% vs. 27%, P < 0.001), mean decision conflict (34.0 vs. 47.0, P < 0.001), and informed choice (41% vs. 23%, P = 0.003). These differences were no longer significant at 6 months. Although our decision support tools did not result in a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, we did observe improvements in decision antecedents and decision quality measures. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: In this randomized controlled trial of decision support for 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers, we did not observe a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, which remained low at under 5%. However, these decision support tools may increase knowledge and informed choice about breast cancer chemoprevention.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAdultAgedChemopreventionDecision Support TechniquesEstrogen Receptor ModulatorsFemaleHumansInternetMiddle AgedEstrogen Receptor Modulators

Identifiers

PMID35679576
PMCPMC9532364

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.