Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36126243›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2023

Team Science Principles Enhance Cancer Care Delivery Quality Improvement: Interdisciplinary Implementation of Breast Cancer Screening Shared Decision Making.

Elizabeth S Burnside, Sarina Schrager, Lori DuBenske, Jon Keevil, Terry Little, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Betsy Rolland, Dhavan Shah, Oguzhan Alagoz

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth S BurnsideSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0002-6600-435X
Sarina SchragerSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Lori DuBenskeSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Jon KeevilHealthDecision Founder, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0002-9288-0097
Terry LittleSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Amy Trentham-DietzSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0002-5971-4660
Betsy RollandSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Dhavan ShahSchool of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Oguzhan AlagozCollege of Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.ORCID 0000-0001-5034-2816
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Justine Yang Bruce · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImplementing shared decision making (SDM), recommended in screening mammography by national guidelines for women age 40-49 years, faces challenges that innovations in quality improvement and team science (TS) are poised to address. We aimed to improve the effectiveness, patient-centeredness, and efficiency of SDM in primary care for breast cancer screening.

methodsOur interdisciplinary team included primary and specialty care, psychology, epidemiology, communication science, engineering, and stakeholders (patients and clinicians). Over a 6-year period, we executed two iterative cycles of plan-do-study-act (PDSA) to develop, revise, and implement a SDM tool using TS principles. Patient and physician surveys and retrospective analysis of tool performance informed our first PDSA cycle. Patient and physician surveys, toolkit use, and clinical outcomes in the second PDSA cycle supported SDM implementation. We gathered team member assessments on the importance of individual TS activities.

resultsOur first PDSA cycle successfully generated a SDM tool called Breast Cancer Risk Estimator, deemed valuable by 87% of patients surveyed. Our second PDSA cycle increased Breast Cancer Risk Estimator utilization, from 2,000 sessions in 2017 to 4,097 sessions in 2019 while maintaining early-stage breast cancer diagnoses. Although TS activities such as culture, trust, and communication needed to be sustained throughout the project, shared goals, research/data infrastructure support, and leadership were more important earlier in the project and persisted in the later stages of the project.

conclusionCombining rigorous quality improvement and TS principles can support the complex, interdependent, and interdisciplinary activities necessary to improve cancer care delivery exemplified by our implementation of a breast cancer screening SDM tool.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAdultDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansInterdisciplinary ResearchMammographyMiddle AgedQuality ImprovementRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36126243
PMCPMC10476722
OpenAlexW4296783958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.