ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of a decision aid on mammography screening uptake: study protocol.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05607849 (Shared Decision-making for Breast Cancer Screening in Primary Care), which is not on this 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.
Shared Decision-making for Breast Cancer Screening in Primary Care
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Making the BEST Decision-the BESTa Project: Description of the Design and Alpha Phases as Part of the Development of a Digital Decision Aid for Cancer Screening in Sweden.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Improving shared decision making for lung cancer treatment by developing and validating an open-source web based patient decision aid for stage I-II non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Breast cancer (BC) is the primary cancer among women. The World Health Organization recommends a bilateral screening mammogram every 2 years for women aged 50 to 74 years. However, it has been shown that there is an absence of information about the benefits and risks of screening. Shared medical decision-making is important to ensure patients are involved in the decision process. Decision aids can facilitative this decision-making process. This article presents a protocol to evaluate the effect of a decision aid on participation rates in the French organized BC screening program. Methods and analysis: Design and setting. The design is a 2 arm randomized controlled study, performed in the Pays de la Loire region (French West Coast). Randomization will be based on general medicine practices (Primary Care). Participants: Women aged between 50 and 74 years, eligible for BC screening. In this region, there are 75000 women, and 2800 general practitioners eligible for recruitment. Intervention: In the « Decision aid for organized cancer screening » arm, the intervention will distribute invitation letters to eligible women combined with the provision of decision aid to these women and their general practitioners and an incentive to implement shared medical decision-making. In the « Standard organized cancer screening » arm, only the screening invitation will be sent to eligible women. Primary endpoint: BC screening participation rates will be assessed after an 18-month follow-up period. Statistical analysis: In this non-inferiority trial, the percentage of women who are up-to-date with their screening at 18 months after the intervention will be compared across arms using a generalized mixed linear model. Discussion: The research team expect to demonstrate that providing a better explanation of the benefits and risks of BC screening is not at odds with screening participation. The study results should help policy makers thinking about implementing shared medical decision-making within the framework of organized BC screening programs in the future. Ethics and dissemination: On 6 December 2021, the protocol received a favorable opinion from the French Committee for the Protection of Persons (2021-A01583-38). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05607849. (Version 1, November 7, 2022; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05607849). The study findings will be used for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations in scientific meetings.
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.