Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38475758›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Impact of timing and format of patient decision aids for breast cancer patients on their involvement in and preparedness for decision making - the IMPACTT randomised controlled trial protocol.

Bettina Mølri Knudsen, Stine Rauff Søndergaard, Dawn Stacey, Karina Dahl Steffensen

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05573022 (Impact of a Patient Decision Aid Intervention for Cancer Patients. Does Timing and Format Matter?), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT05573022 nacompletednot on this map

Impact of a Patient Decision Aid Intervention for Cancer Patients. Does Timing and Format Matter?

TypeinterventionalSponsorVejle HospitalRan2022 to 2025Enrolled274ConditionsCancer, Breast, Cancer ColorectalArmsPre-consultation electronic patient decision aid, In-consultation paper-based patient decision aid
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bettina Mølri KnudsenCenter for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Beriderbakken 4, 7100, Vejle, Denmark. Bettina.Knudsen@rsyd.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6231-3374
Stine Rauff SøndergaardDepartment of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2259-4829
Dawn StaceyDepartment of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2681-741X
Karina Dahl SteffensenCenter for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Beriderbakken 4, 7100, Vejle, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9217-3907
University of Southern Denmark · DKUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

The Cancer Foundation 10272-0007The Region of Southern Denmark A1821The Research Fund at Lillebaelt Hospital 2022-2310
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAfter curative surgery for early-stage breast cancer, patients face a decision on whether to undergo surgery alone or to receive one or more adjuvant treatments, which may lower the risk of recurrence. Variations in survival outcomes are often marginal but there are differences in the side effects and other features of the options that patients may value differently. Hence, the patient's values and preferences are critical in determining what option to choose. It is well-researched that the use of shared decision making and patient decision aids can support this choice in a discussion between patient and clinician. However, it is still to be investigated what impact the timing and format of the patient decision aid have on shared decision making outcomes. In this trial, we aim to investigate the impact of a digital pre-consult compared to a paper-based in-consult patient decision aid on patients' involvement in shared decision making, decisional conflict and preparedness to make a decision.

methodsThe study is a randomised controlled trial with 204 patients at two Danish oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients are newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and offered adjuvant treatments after curative surgery to lower the risk of recurrence. Participants will be randomised to receive either an in-consult paper-based patient decision aid or a pre-consult digital patient decision aid. Data collection includes patient and clinician-reported outcomes as well as observer-reported shared decision making based on audio recordings of the consultation. The primary outcome is the extent to which patients are engaged in a shared decision making process reported by the patient. Secondary aims include the length of consultation, preparation for decision making, preferred role in shared decision making and decisional conflict. DISCUSSION: This study is the first known randomised, controlled trial comparing a digital, pre-consult patient decision aid to an identical paper-based, in-consult patient decision aid. It will contribute evidence on the impact of patient decision aids in terms of investigating if pre-consult digital patient decisions aids compared to in-consult paper-based decision aids support the cancer patients in being better prepared for decision making.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05573022).

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansPatient ParticipationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignBreast cancerPatient decision aidRCTShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID38475758
PMCPMC10935979
OpenAlexW4392679458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.