Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37478123›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Women's views about current and future management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS): A mixed-methods study.

Brooke Nickel, Kirsten McCaffery, Jesse Jansen, Alexandra Barratt, Nehmat Houssami, Christobel Saunders, Andrew Spillane, Claudia Rutherford, Kirsty Stuart, Geraldine Robertson and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. 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
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Risk perception of patients with ductal carcinomaHistology and histopathology · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Brooke NickelFaculty of Medicine and Health, Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8100-4278
Kirsten McCafferyFaculty of Medicine and Health, Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jesse JansenDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Alexandra BarrattFaculty of Medicine and Health, Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nehmat HoussamiFaculty of Medicine and Health, Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Christobel SaundersDepartment of Surgery, Melbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Andrew SpillaneNorthern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
Claudia RutherfordFaculty of Science, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kirsty StuartDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Geraldine RobertsonBreast Cancer Network Australia, Camberwell, VIC, Australia.
Ann DixonFaculty of Science, Sydney Neuropsychology Clinic, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jolyn HerschFaculty of Medicine and Health, Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5225-6639
The University of Sydney · AUBreast Cancer Network Australia · AUMaastricht University · NLThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial, with clinical trials currently assessing the safety of active monitoring amidst concern about overtreatment. Little is known about general community views regarding DCIS and its management. We aimed to explore women's understanding and views about low-risk DCIS and current and potential future management options. This mixed-method study involved qualitative focus groups and brief quantitative questionnaires. Participants were screening-aged (50-74 years) women, with diverse socioeconomic backgrounds and no personal history of breast cancer/DCIS, recruited from across metropolitan Sydney, Australia. Sessions incorporated an informative presentation interspersed with group discussions which were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Fifty-six women took part in six age-stratified focus groups. Prior awareness of DCIS was limited, however women developed reasonable understanding of DCIS and the relevant issues. Overall, women expressed substantial support for active monitoring being offered as a management approach for low-risk DCIS, and many were interested in participating in a hypothetical clinical trial. Although some women expressed concern that current management may sometimes represent overtreatment, there were mixed views about personally accepting monitoring. Women noted a number of important questions and considerations that would factor into their decision making. Our findings about women's perceptions of active monitoring for DCIS are timely while results of ongoing clinical trials of monitoring are awaited, and may inform clinicians and investigators designing future, similar trials. Exploration of offering well-informed patients the choice of non-surgical management of low-risk DCIS, even outside a clinical trial setting, may be warranted.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingAgedAustraliaClinical Trials as TopicFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID37478123
PMCPMC10361483
OpenAlexW4385064097

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.