Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36059240›Full record

Trial reportMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2023

Operating on Anxiety: Negative Affect toward Breast Cancer and Choosing Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy.

Michael C Silverstein, Clara N Lee, Laura D Scherer, Crystal Phommasathit, Andrea L Merrill, Ellen Peters

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2023. 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
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Effect of a Surgeon Communication Strategy on Treatment Preference for Thyroid Cancer: A Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michael C SilversteinDepartment of Psychology, Center for Science Communication Research, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5497-3578
Clara N LeeDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Division of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, OSU Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0514-9448
Laura D SchererSchool of Medicine on the Anschutz Medical Campus, University of Colorado, VA Denver Center for Innovation, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8660-7115
Crystal PhommasathitComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Andrea L MerrillDepartment of Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Ellen PetersCenter for Science Communication Research, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.
The Ohio State University · USUniversity of Oregon · USBoston Medical Center · USCenter for Innovation · US

Funding

Understanding affective processing of scientific evidence to promote informed choice for breast cancer screeningR37CA254926 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Laura D. Scherer · 2021 to 2026
$3.8M
NCI NIH HHS R37 CA254926
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM)-removal of the healthy breast following breast cancer diagnosis-have increased, particularly among women for whom CPM provides no survival benefit. Affective (i.e., emotional) decision making is often blamed for this increase. We studied whether greater negative breast cancer affect could motivate uptake of CPM through increased cancer risk perceptions and biased treatment evaluations.

methodsWe randomly assigned healthy women with average breast-cancer risk (

resultsThe manipulation caused women in the negative and neutral narrative conditions (26.9% and 26.4%, respectively) to choose CPM more compared with the positive narrative condition (19.1%). Across conditions, women's CPM affect did not differ. However, exploratory analyses addressing a possible association of affect toward cancer-related targets suggested that women in the negative narrative condition may have felt more positively toward CPM than women in the positive narrative condition. The manipulation did not have significant effects on breast cancer risk perceptions. LIMITATIONS: The manipulation of affect had a small effect size, possibly due to the hypothetical nature of this study and/or strong a priori knowledge and attitudes about breast cancer and its treatment options.

conclusionIncreased negative affect toward breast cancer increased choice of CPM over other surgical options and might have motivated more positive affective evaluations of CPM. HIGHLIGHTS: This study used narratives to elicit different levels of negative integral affect toward breast cancer to investigate the effects of affect on breast cancer treatment choices.Increased negative affect toward breast cancer increased the choice of double mastectomy over lumpectomy and single mastectomy to treat a hypothetical, early-stage cancer.The narrative manipulation of negative affect toward breast cancer did not change the perceived risks of future cancer following any of the surgical interventions.Negative affect toward breast cancer may have biased affective evaluations of double mastectomy.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsProphylactic MastectomyAdultAffectAnxietyDecision MakingFemaleHumansMastectomyaffectbreast cancer decisionscontralateral prophylactic mastectomyemotionmotivated reasoningsurgical decisions

Identifiers

PMID36059240
PMCPMC9898882
OpenAlexW4294578572

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.