Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40884781›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2025

Development of a Decision Aid for Patients With Low-Risk Thyroid Cancer: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Feedback From Both Patient and Clinicians.

Christine J O'Neill, Ahmad Alam, Michelle Chapman, Melissa Carlson, Suzanne Clark-Pitrolo, Elizabeth A Fradgley, Christine Paul, Nicholas Zdenkowski, Christopher W Rowe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

9 authors.

Christine J O'NeillSurgical Services, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3122-8660
Ahmad AlamSurgical Services, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Michelle ChapmanSurgical Services, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Melissa CarlsonUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Suzanne Clark-PitroloHunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Elizabeth A FradgleyUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Christine PaulUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Nicholas ZdenkowskiUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Christopher W RoweUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

NSW Regional Cancer Research Network NSWRCRN/SR23-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGuideline-driven de-escalation of the extent of surgery for low-risk thyroid cancer has made treatment decisions more complex. Shared decision-making (SDM) is more involved than informed consent, improves patient satisfaction, and is considered standard of care. Patient decision aids (DA) can facilitate SDM but appropriate resources are lacking.

methodsDA development occurred in 3 main phases. First, a prototype DA was developed and refined by a working group (clinicians, behavioral scientists, nurses, and trained consumer). Nationwide clinician consultation sessions obtained mixed-methods feedback leading to a hybrid paper-web DA ready for patient testing. Second, the paper DA was used within clinically appropriate consultations (Bethesda 3-6 thyroid nodules) and patient feedback obtained with the Ottawa acceptability and decisional conflict scales. Three cycles of iterative changes were made to the DA. Patient focus groups led to further refinements. Third, 40 clinicians were invited to review DA materials, providing mixed-methods feedback.

resultsInitial clinician consultation sessions (n = 113) revealed that surgeons used information resources more frequently in, and were more satisfied with, their current patient discussions around thyroid cancer management compared with endocrinologists (88% vs. 32% and 95% vs. 46% respectively, p < 0.01 for both). 95% of clinicians were open to using the DA, but concerns regarding availability, appropriateness, flexibility, credibility and potential to lengthen consultations, were raised. Patients reported that the DA was useful (97% paper, 100% web) and sufficient (85% paper, 100% web). Decisional conflict was low (17 paper vs. 12 web). Qualitative feedback led to changes to improve visual appeal, readability and minimize emotive responses. Clinician review of DA (60% response) reported no bias (73% paper, 79% web) and 86% felt the DA would be easily incorporated into practice.

conclusionWe present a hybrid paper and web-DA ready for wider testing in patients with low-risk thyroid cancer to complement SDM regarding the extent of surgery.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesPatient ParticipationThyroid NeoplasmsAdultFeedbackFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Satisfactioncancer survivorshipfear of cancer recurrenceshared decision makingthyroid cancerthyroidectomy

Identifiers

PMID40884781
PMCPMC12515032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.