ReviewJMIR cancer2024
Lessons Learned From Shared Decision-Making With Oral Anticoagulants: Viewpoint on Suggestions for the Development of Oral Chemotherapy Decision Aids.
Review in JMIR cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Oral chemotherapy is commonly prescribed, and by using decision aids (DAs), clinicians can facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) to align treatment choices with patient goals and values. Although products exist commercially, little evidence informs the development of DAs targeting the unique challenges of oral chemotherapy. To address this gap in the literature, our objective was to review DAs developed for oral anticoagulation, DA use in oncology, and patient preference surveys to guide the development of DAs for oral chemotherapy. We focused on reviewing SDM, patient preferences, and specifically the development, efficacy, and patient experience of DAs in oral anticoagulation and oncologic conditions, ultimately including conclusions and data from 30 peer-reviewed publications in our viewpoint paper. We found that effective DAs in oral anticoagulation improved knowledge, lowered decisional conflict, increased adherence, and covered a broad range of SDM elements; however, limited information on patient experience was a common shortcoming. In oncology, DAs increased knowledge and aligned decisions with the values of the patients. Ineffective oncology DAs provided general, unclear, or overly optimistic information, while providing "too much" information was not shown to do harm. Patients preferred DAs that included pros and cons, side effects, questions to ask, and expected quality of life changes. In developing DAs for oral chemotherapy, patients should be included in the development process, and DA content should be specifically tailored to patient preferences. Providing DAs ahead of appointments proved more effective than during, and additional considerations included addressing barriers to efficacy. There is a need for evidence-based DAs to facilitate SDM for patients considering oral chemotherapy. Developers should use data from studies in oral anticoagulation, oncology, and preference surveys to optimize SDM.
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.