Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145395›Full record

Observational studyActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025

Evaluation of a patient decision aid for opportunistic salpingectomy and salpingectomy as sterilization method to prevent ovarian cancer.

Malou E Gelderblom, Charlotte Fisch, Jurgen M J Piek, Laura A M van Lieshout, Justine Briet, Lauren Bullens, Sjors F P J Coppus, Inge Ebisch, Alexandra A van Ginkel, Rafli van de Laar and 12 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. 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. Observational
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

22 authors.

Malou E GelderblomDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2232-4626
Charlotte FischDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6103-3285
Jurgen M J PiekDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Laura A M van LieshoutDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Justine BrietDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, ZGT, Almelo, The Netherlands.
Lauren BullensDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Streekziekenhuis Koningin Beatrix, Winterswijk, The Netherlands.
Sjors F P J CoppusDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maxima Medical Center, Veldhoven/Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Inge EbischDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Alexandra A van GinkelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Rafli van de LaarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, VieCuri Hospital, Venlo, The Netherlands.
Natascha de LangeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Marloes MaassenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medisch Spectrum Twente Hospital, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Huy NgoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Elkerliek Hospital, Helmond, The Netherlands.
Angele L M OeiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bernhoven Hospital, Uden, The Netherlands.
Brenda PijlmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, The Netherlands.
Brigitte SlangenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW- School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Regina TheDevelopment and Implementation of Decision Aids, ZorgKeuzeLab, Delft, The Netherlands.
Dineke SmedtsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Caroline VosDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Joanna IntHoutDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Joanne A de HulluDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Rosella P M G HermensDepartment of IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding 2018-1; 11515
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA patient decision aid on opportunistic salpingectomy and salpingectomy as a sterilization method has been developed to provide uniform counseling and reduce practice variation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of the patient decision aid in daily clinical practice to ensure its effectiveness and usability, as well as its influence on the decision-making process and the decision of opportunistic salpingectomy. MATERIAL AND

methodsAs part of the STOPOVCA-implementation study, we conducted a multicenter observational study in 16 hospitals between July 2020 and February 2024. Patients who were eligible for opportunistic salpingectomy were invited to use the decision aid while they considered whether or not to undergo opportunistic salpingectomy. Digital questionnaires were used to evaluate the decision aid, the decision process, and patients' decisions 6-8 weeks post-surgery.

results425 out of 542 patients participated in the questionnaire. A majority of these 425 patients received (N = 357; 84%) and used the decision aid (N = 347; 82%). Two thirds (N = 234; 67%) of those who used the decision aid stated that it increased their knowledge of opportunistic salpingectomy. Patients considered the decision aid a usable aid, allocating a score of 8.1 out of 10 and would recommend it to other patients facing the decision regarding opportunistic salpingectomy. Patients considered the extent to which they were involved in the decision-making process as high, and the decisional conflict low. The majority of patients who used the decision aid opted for opportunistic salpingectomy (N = 326; 95%). Main reasons for choosing opportunistic salpingectomy were the risk-reducing effect of ovarian cancer (N = 311; 90%) and the lack of functionality of the fallopian tubes after childbearing (N = 320; 92%).

conclusionsThe patient decision aid was used by a majority of patients who received it. The decision aid was regarded by patients as user-friendly, and it was recommended to be used in the decision-making process for opportunistic salpingectomy. Patients stated that the decision aid provides reliable information and increases patients' knowledge of opportunistic salpingectomy.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesOvarian NeoplasmsPatient ParticipationSalpingectomyAdultDecision MakingFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnairesfemale sterilizationovarian cancerpatient decision aidpreventionsalpingectomy

Identifiers

PMID40145395
PMCPMC12087513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.