Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39776944›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2024

Improving communication to increase uptake of high-risk breast cancer prevention appointments: Building a better letter.

Evan K Perrault, Maria K Venetis, Tarah J Ballinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Learning from brilliant failures.PEC innovation · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Evan K PerraultPurdue University, Brian Lamb School of Communication, 100 N. University St., West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.
Maria K VenetisRutgers University, School of Communication and Information, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Tarah J BallingerIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Mailed letters to women identified as being at high-risk for developing breast cancer were not having the desired effect for encouraging appointments with prevention-focused providers at a large Midwest healthcare system. A partnership with communication scholars sought to revise the letter to increase awareness, intentions, and appointments. Methods: Guided by the Extended Parallel Process Model, survey responses were collected from letter recipients over the course of two years, both pre and post letter revision. Appointments attributed to letters were also tracked. Results: Recipients of the revised letter had increased knowledge regarding the length of prevention appointments and indicated greater self-efficacy and intentions to make and attend appointments compared to those who received the non-revised letter. A greater percentage who received the revised letter also made appointments. Conclusion: Partnering with communication scholars helped with improving a letter mailed to thousands of patients each year. Finding ways to increase response-efficacy of breast cancer prevention activities within communications may assist in increasing appointments. Innovation: Cross-disciplinary partnerships across the medical and social sciences - while not quick or simple - are essential for finding ways to improve patient wellbeing and hopefully reducing the prevalence of preventable diseases in the future.

Indexed as

Breast cancerCommunicationHealth communicationLetterMailingPrevention

Identifiers

PMID39776944
PMCPMC11705378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.