SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Feasibility and Efficacy of Decision Aids to Improve Decision-Making for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral breast cancer have increased significantly. Decision aids (DAs) can support the shared decision-making process. This study systematically reviewed the literature to understand the feasibility and efficacy of using DAs to improve decision outcomes about CPM.
methodsSix databases were searched through April 2024. Included studies reported on patient DAs about CPM after diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer for average- or low-risk patients. Two investigators reviewed 6186 abstracts and 155 full-text articles, extracting data for studies that met the criteria. Data quality assessment was performed using GRADE.
resultsThe review included six studies published from 2017 to 2021. Four (66.7%) studies reported solely on patient acceptance of the DAs, whereas two (33.3%) studies included clinicians. Three (50%) DAs were formatted for online delivery, whereas two (33.3%) were formatted for paper delivery, and one (16.7%) was formatted for unknown delivery. Two (33.3%) research teams used a multi-disciplinary group to develop their DA. Overall, patient satisfaction with the DAs was high, and knowledge scores increased, but little consensus existed on when to introduce the DA. Important DA characteristics measured were use with or without a clinician, literacy considerations, and the order and balance of information.
conclusionsMore research should be conducted to develop and test DAs for CPM decisions, with attention to the balance of information, type of content, format, timing, and optimal delivery of such DAs. Future research in larger, multi-institutional populations using standardized, validated measures for satisfaction, values, decisional conflict, and health literacy could assess the impact of DAs for CPM.
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.