Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36522635›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022

Development and pilot testing of a decision aid for navigating breast cancer survivorship care.

Yu Ke, Ivy Cheng, Gretchen Ser Hua Tan, Rose Wai Yee Fok, Jack Junjie Chan, Kiley Wei-Jen Loh, Alexandre Chan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yu KeDepartment of Pharmacy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Ivy ChengDepartment of Pharmacy, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Gretchen Ser Hua TanDepartment of Pharmacy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Rose Wai Yee FokDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jack Junjie ChanDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Kiley Wei-Jen LohDivision of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Alexandre ChanDepartment of Pharmacy, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. a.chan@uci.edu.
National Cancer Centre Singapore · SGNational University of Singapore · SGDuke-NUS Medical School · SG

Funding

National University of Singapore Global Asia Institute NIHA-2018-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe predominant oncologist-led model in many countries is unsustainable to meet the needs of a growing cohort of breast cancer survivors (BCS). Despite available alternative models, adoption rates have been poor. To help BCS navigate survivorship care, we aimed to systematically develop a decision aid (DA) to guide their choice of follow-up care model and evaluate its acceptability and usability among BCS and health care providers (HCPs).

methodsWe recruited BCS aged ≥ 21 years who have completed primary treatment and understand English. BCS receiving palliative care or with cognitive impairment were excluded. HCPs who routinely discussed post-treatment care with BCS were purposively sampled based on disciplines. Each participant reviewed the DA during a semi-structured interview using the 'think aloud' approach and completed an acceptability questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and directed content analysis were used.

resultsWe conducted three rounds of alpha testing with 15 BCS and 8 HCPs. All BCS found the final DA prototype easy to navigate with sufficient interactivity. The information imbalance favouring the shared care option perceived by 60% of BCS in early rounds was rectified. The length of DA was optimized to be 'just right'. Key revisions made included (1) presenting care options side-by-side to improve perceived information balance, (2) creating dedicated sections explaining HCPs' care roles to address gaps in health system contextual knowledge, and (3) employing a multicriteria decision analysis method for preference clarification exercise to reflect the user's openness towards shared care. Most BCS (73%) found the DA useful for decision-making, and 93% were willing to discuss the DA with their HCPs. Most HCPs (88%) agreed that the DA was a reliable tool and would be easily integrated into routine care.

conclusionsOur experience highlighted the need to provide contextual information on the health care system for decisions related to care delivery. Developers should address potential variability within the care model and clarify inherent biases, such as low confidence levels in primary care. Future work could expand on the developed DA's informational structure to apply to other care models and leverage artificial intelligence to optimize information delivery.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsArtificial IntelligenceDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansSurvivorshipAlpha testingCancerCare modelsDecision aidDevelopmentShared decision makingSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID36522635
PMCPMC9753367
OpenAlexW4311531335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.