ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023
Development and user testing of a patient decision aid for cancer patients considering treatment for anxiety or depression.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of a Digital Decision Aid When Choosing Between Face-to-Face and Guided Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for Depression Among Chinese-Speaking Participants in Hong Kong: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Navigating Concurrent Diagnoses With Cancer and Mental Health Disorder: Patients' Perspectives on Personalised Treatment and Care.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite high rates of mental health disorders among cancer patients, uptake of referral to psycho-oncology services remains low. This study aims to develop and seek clinician and patient feedback on a patient decision aid (PDA) for cancer patients making decisions about treatment for anxiety and/or depression.
methodsDevelopment was informed by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Psycho-oncology professionals provided feedback on the clinical accuracy, acceptability, and usability of a prototype PDA. Cognitive interviews with 21 cancer patients/survivors assessed comprehensibility, acceptability, and usefulness. Interviews were thematically analysed using Framework Analysis.
resultsClinicians and patients strongly endorsed the PDA. Clinicians suggested minor amendments to improve clarity and increase engagement. Patient feedback focused on clarifying the purpose of the PDA and improving the clarity of the values clarification exercises (VCEs).
conclusionsThe PDA, the first of its kind for psycho-oncology, was acceptable to clinicians and patients. Valuable feedback was obtained for the revision of the PDA and VCEs.
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.