ReviewJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2026
Effectiveness of decision aids on decisional conflict and treatment or disease knowledge among women diagnosed with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDecision aids are paper-based, digital, or multimedia tools that present treatment options with their benefits and harms and help patients clarify their values alongside clinician counselling. Decisional conflict refers to uncertainty about which treatment option to choose when alternatives involve competing risks, benefits, and personal values. Decision aids support women with breast cancer in making treatment decisions, but evidence on their effectiveness is fragmented and methodologically variable. This systematic review evaluated their effects on decisional conflict, treatment or disease knowledge, and other decision-related outcomes, and examined potential moderators of these effects.
methodsWe systematically searched seven electronic databases and reported the review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The search was updated through 07 February 2026, and no additional trials were identified. We conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model with inverse variance weighting. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE.
resultsWe included eighteen studies, of which eleven contributed to the meta-analyses. Decision aids moderately reduced decisional conflict (standardised mean difference - 0.57; 95% CI - 0.95 to - 0.18) and increased treatment or disease knowledge (standardised mean difference 0.56; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.93). Reductions in decisional conflict persisted for up to 4 months, but effects on treatment or disease knowledge at follow-up and on other outcomes were not significant. Heterogeneity was substantial for both primary outcomes, and the certainty of evidence was very low.
conclusionDecision aids may reduce decisional conflict and increase treatment or disease knowledge among women with breast cancer, although the certainty of evidence is very low. Decision aids may be considered as part of shared decision-making, but adequately powered trials are needed to determine which formats, theoretical frameworks, and delivery modes are most effective. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: For women with breast cancer, decision aids may reduce decisional conflict and improve treatment and disease knowledge, supporting informed shared decision-making, though evidence certainty is very low and broader wellbeing outcomes were unaffected.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42397541What 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.