Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37573282›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Decision-Making: The Partners' Perspective.

Amanda L Nash, Diane L Bloom, Brittany M Chapman, Stephanie B Wheeler, Kandace P McGuire, Clara N Lee, Kevin Weinfurt, Donald L Rosenstein, Jennifer K Plichta, Julie C Jacobson Vann and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Amanda L NashDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. amanda.nash@duke.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5558-212X
Diane L BloomDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Brittany M ChapmanDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Stephanie B WheelerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Kandace P McGuireDepartment of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Health, Richmond, VA, USA.
Clara N LeeDivision of Health Services Management and Policy, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, OSU Comprehensive Cancer Center, College of Medicine, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Kevin WeinfurtDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Donald L RosensteinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Jennifer K PlichtaDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Julie C Jacobson VannSchool of Nursing, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
E Shelley HwangDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USCleveland Clinic · USDuke Medical Center · USThe Ohio State University · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) continues to rise despite no improvement in survival, an increased risk of surgical complications, and negative effects on quality of life. This study explored the experiences of the partners of women who undergo CPM.

methodsThis study was part of an investigation into the factors motivating women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer and low genetic risk to opt for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). Participating women were asked for permission to invite their partners to take part in interviews. In-depth interviews with partners were conducted using a semi-structured topic guide. A thematic analysis of the data was performed

resultsOf 35 partners, all men, 15 agreed to be interviewed. Most perceived their role to be strong and logical. Some hoped their wives would choose a bilateral mastectomy. All felt strongly that the final decision was up to their partners. The partners often framed the decision for CPM as one of life or death. Thus, any aesthetic effects were unimportant by comparison. The male partners had difficulty grasping the physical and emotional changes inherent in mastectomy, which made communicating about sexuality and intimacy very challenging for the couples. In the early recovery period, some noted the stress of managing home life.

conclusionsThe experiences of the male partners provide insight into how couples navigate complex treatment decision-making, both together and separately. There may be a benefit to including partners in pre- and post-surgical counseling to mitigate miscommunication regarding the expected oncologic and emotional outcomes related to CPM.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsProphylactic MastectomyDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMastectomyQuality of LifeContralateral prophylactic mastectomyDecision-makingExperiencePartnerRole

Identifiers

PMID37573282
OpenAlexW4385779649

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.