Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38409512›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2024

Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations.

Jenna Smith, Erin Cvejic, Nehmat Houssami, Mara A Schonberg, Wendy Vincent, Vasi Naganathan, Jesse Jansen, Rachael H Dodd, Katharine Wallis, Kirsten J McCaffery

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Jenna SmithSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0480-8125
Erin CvejicSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nehmat HoussamiThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with the Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Mara A SchonbergDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Wendy VincentBreastScreen NSW, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Vasi NaganathanFaculty of Medicine and Health, Concord Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jesse JansenFaculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Rachael H DoddThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with the Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Katharine WallisGeneral Practice Clinical Unit, Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Kirsten J McCafferyEdward Ford Building (A27), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. kirsten.mccaffery@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

Research and mentoring program in shared decision making in the care of older adultsK24AG071906 · NIA · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI SCHONBERG, MARA A · 2021 to 2025
$946k
National Health and Medical Research Council 2016719NIA NIH HHS K24 AG071906
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention).

methodsIn a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years.

resultsA total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001).

conclusionsProviding information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples.

trial registrationANZCTRN12623000033640.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMammographyAgedAustraliaFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMass ScreeningPatient Education as Topic

Identifiers

PMID38409512
PMCPMC11169431

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.