A dynamic web-based decision aid to improve informed choice in organised breast cancer screening. A pragmatic randomised trial in Italy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Improving the quality of information and communication is a priority in organised breast cancer screening and an ethical duty. Programmes must offer the information each woman is looking for, promoting informed decision-making. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a web-based dynamic decision aid (DA).Methods
A pragmatic randomised trial carried out in six regional organised screening programmes recruited women at the first invitation receiving DA or a web-based standard brochure (SB). The primary outcome was informed choice measured on knowledge, attitudes, and intentions. Follow-up period: 7-10 days. Secondary outcomes included participation rate, satisfaction, decisional conflict, and acceptability of DA.Results
Two thousand one hundred and nineteen women were randomised and 1001 completed the study. Respectively, 43.9% and 36.9% in the DA and SB reached the informed choice. The DA gave a 13-point higher proportion of women aware about overdiagnosis compared to SB (38.3% versus 25.2%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of women attending screening was the same: 84% versus 83%. Decisional conflict was significantly lower in the DA group (14.4%) than in the SB group (19.3%).Conclusion
DA increases informed choice. Complete information including the pros, cons, controversies, and overdiagnosis-overtreatment issues boost a woman's knowledge without reducing the rate of actual screening participation.Clinical trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03097653.
SUBMITTER: Roberto A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7462858 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDecision aids can support informed choice in mammography screening, but for the German mammography screening programme no systematically evaluated decision aid exists to date. We developed a decision aid for women invited to this programme for the first time based on the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration.ObjectiveTo determine whether a decision aid increases informed choice about mammography screening programme participation.MethodsA representative sample of 7,400 women aged 50 was drawn from registration offices in Westphalia-Lippe, Germany. Women were randomised to receive usual care (i.e., the standard information brochure sent with the programme's invitation letter) or the decision aid. Data were collected online at baseline, post-intervention, and 3 months follow-up. The primary outcome was informed choice. Secondary outcomes were the constituents of informed choice (knowledge, attitude, intention/uptake), decisional conflict, decision regret, and decision stage. Outcomes were analysed using latent structural equation models and χ2-tests.Results1,206 women participated (response rate of 16.3%). The decision aid increased informed choice. Women in the control group had lower odds to make an informed choice at post-intervention (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18-0.37) and at follow-up (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46-0.94); informed choices remained constant at 30%. This was also reflected in lower knowledge and more decisional conflict. Post-intervention, the uptake intention was higher in the control group, whereas the uptake rate at follow-up was similar. Women in the control group had a more positive attitude at follow-up than women receiving the decision aid. Decision regret and decision stage were not influenced by the intervention.ConclusionThis paper describes the first systematic evaluation of a newly developed decision aid for the German mammography screening programme in a randomised controlled trial. Our decision aid proved to be an effective tool to enhance the rate of informed choice and was made accessible to the public.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00005176.
| S-EPMC5728514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Chemotherapy may cause infertility in young survivors of breast cancer. Various fertility preservation techniques increase the likelihood of survivors becoming genetic mothers. Disclosure of cancer diagnosis may impact decision making about fertility preservation. This protocol will develop and test the effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for helping women with breast cancer to make well-informed choices about fertility preservation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This study will be conducted in three phases using mixed methods. In phase I, the aim is to develop a web-based patient decision aid (PDA) in French with a steering committee and using a focus group of five women already treated for breast cancer. In phase II, the face validity of the decision aid will be assessed using questionnaires. In phase III, the PDA will be assessed by a two-arm randomised controlled trial. This will involve a quantitative evaluation of the PDA in clinical practice comparing the quality of the decision-making process between usual care and the PDA. The primary outcome will be informed choice and its components. The secondary outcomes will be decisional conflict and anxiety. Data will be collected during and after an oncofertility consultation. Phase III is underway. Since September 2018, 52 participants have been enrolled in the study and have completed the survey. We expect to have results by February 2020 for a total of 186 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study protocol was approved by the Ouest V Research Ethics Board. Results will be spread through peer-reviewed publications, and reported at suitable meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:The ClinicalTrials.gov registry .(NCT03591848).
| S-EPMC7044978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tamoxifen and raloxifene are chemopreventive drugs that can reduce women’s relative risk of primary breast cancer by 50%; however, most women eligible for these drugs have chosen not to take them. The reasons for low uptake may be related to women’s knowledge or attitudes towards the drugs. We aimed to examine the impact of an online breast cancer chemoprevention decision aid (DA) on informed intentions and decisions of women at high risk of breast cancer.We conducted a randomized clinical trial, assessing the effect of a DA about breast cancer chemoprevention on informed choices about chemoprevention. Women (n = 585), 46- to 74-years old old, completed online baseline, post-test, and three-month follow-up questionnaires. Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group, a standard control group that answered questions about chemoprevention at baseline, or a three-month control group that did not answer questions about chemoprevention at baseline. The main outcome measures were whether women’s intentions and decisions regarding chemoprevention drugs were informed, and whether women who viewed the DA were more likely to make informed decisions than women who did not view the DA, using a dichotomous composite variable ‘informed choice’ (yes/no) to classify informed decisions as those reflecting sufficient knowledge and concordance between a woman’s decision and relevant attitudes.Analyses showed that more intervention than standard control participants (52.7% versus 5.9%) made informed decisions at post-test, P <0.001. At the three-month follow-up, differences in rates of informed choice between intervention (16.9%) and both control groups (11.8% and 8.0%) were statistically non-significant, P = 0.067.The DA increased informed decision making about breast cancer chemoprevention, although the impact on knowledge diminished over time. This study was not designed to determine how much knowledge decision makers must retain over time. Examining informed decisions increases understanding of the impact of DAs. A standard for defining and measuring sufficient knowledge for informed decisions is needed.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00967824
| S-EPMC3978729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Shared decision making is essential to patient centered care, but can be difficult for busy clinicians to implement into practice. Tools have been developed to aid in shared decision making and embedded in electronic medical records (EMRs) to facilitate use. This study was undertaken to explore the patterns of use and barriers and facilitators to use of two decision aids, the Statin Choice Decision Aid (SCDA) and the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid (DMCDA), in primary care practices where the decision aids are embedded in the EMR.A survey exploring factors that influenced use of each decision aid was sent to eligible primary care clinicians affiliated with the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. Survey data was collected and clinician use of each decision aid via links from the EMR was tracked.The survey response rate was 40% (105/262). Log file data indicated 51% of clinicians used the SCDA and 9% of clinicians used the DMCDA. Reasons for lack of use included lack of knowledge of the EMR link, not finding the decision aids helpful, and time constraints. Survey responses indicated that use of the tool as intended was low, with many clinicians only discussing decision aid topics that they found relevant.Although guidelines for both the treatment of blood cholesterol with a statin and for the treatment of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes recommend shared decision making, tools that facilitate shared decision making are not routinely used even when embedded in the EMR. Even when decision aids are used, their use may not reflect patient centered care.
| S-EPMC5553736 | biostudies-other
Project description:"Degree of certainty" refers to the subjective belief, prior to feedback, that a decision is correct. A reliable estimate of certainty is essential for prediction, learning from mistakes, and planning subsequent actions when outcomes are not immediate. It is generally thought that certainty is informed by a neural representation of evidence at the time of a decision. Here we show that certainty is also informed by the time taken to form the decision. Human subjects reported simultaneously their choice and confidence about the direction of a noisy display of moving dots. Certainty was inversely correlated with reaction times and directly correlated with motion strength. Moreover, these correlations were preserved even for error responses, a finding that contradicts existing explanations of certainty based on signal detection theory. We also contrived a stimulus manipulation that led to longer decision times without affecting choice accuracy, thus demonstrating that deliberation time itself informs the estimate of certainty. We suggest that elapsed decision time informs certainty because it serves as a proxy for task difficulty.
| S-EPMC4271191 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe decision to take up colorectal cancer screening has to be made on informed grounds balancing benefits and harms. Self-administered decision aids can support citizens in making an informed choice. A self-administered web-based decision aid targeting citizens with lower educational attainment has been evaluated within the target population. However, the effectiveness in the general screening population remains unexplored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for colorectal cancer screening on components of informed choice among previous non-participants in colorectal cancer screening.Methods and findingsThe study was designed as a parallel randomised controlled trial among non-participants in colorectal cancer screening in Central Denmark Region (men and women aged 53-74 years). Respondents to baseline and follow-up questionnaires comprised the study population (n = 1,723). The intervention group received the decision aid electronically along with the second reminder. The control group received only the second reminder. The main outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, uptake and decisional conflict) were obtained through questionnaires data and from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database. The decision aid increased the uptake rate by 8 percentage points (95% CI: 3.4;12.6) but had no effect on either knowledge (scale score differences: 0.09; 95% CI: -0.05;0.24) or attitudes (0.45; 95% CI: -0.00;0.91). Decisional conflict decreased by 1.69 scale points (95% CI: -3.18;-0.20). The effect was similar across educational attainment levels.ConclusionsThe web-based decision aid offers a feasible way to provide individualised screening information in a "one size fits all" approach that may hold the potential to increase informed CRC screening uptake.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03253888.
| S-EPMC7654753 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextAdvanced cancer patients have unrecognized gaps in their understanding about palliative radiation therapy (PRT).ObjectivesTo build a video decision aid for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer referred for PRT and prospectively test its efficacy in reducing decisional uncertainty, improving knowledge, increasing treatment readiness and readiness for palliative care consultation, and its acceptability among patients.MethodsForty patients with advanced cancer hospitalized at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center watched a video decision aid about PRT and palliative care. Patients' conceptual and logistical knowledge of PRT, decisional uncertainty, treatment readiness, and readiness for palliative care consultation were assessed before and after watching the video with a six-item knowledge survey, the decisional uncertainty subscale of the Decisional Conflict Scale, and Likert instruments to assess readiness to accept radiation treatment and/or palliative care consultation, respectively. A postvideo survey assessed the video's acceptability among patients.ResultsAfter watching the video, decisional uncertainty was reduced (28.3 vs. 21.7; P = 0.02), knowledge of PRT improved (60.4 vs. 88.3; P < 0.001), and PRT readiness increased (2.0 vs. 1.3; P = 0.04). Readiness for palliative care consultation was unchanged (P = 0.58). Patients felt very comfortable (70%) watching the video and would highly recommend it (75%) to others.ConclusionAmong hospitalized patients with advanced cancer, a video decision aid reduced decisional uncertainty, improved knowledge of PRT, increased readiness for PRT, and was well received by patient viewers.
| S-EPMC8132595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionProstate cancer is one of the most frequent cancers among men. However, screening for prostate cancer carries many risks and a small benefit. Thus, based on the available evidence, most medical organisations advocate a shared decision-making process, in which decision aids may play an important role. Nevertheless, to date there is no such instrument to be used by Portuguese men. Our goal is to translate and perform the cultural adaptation of an English language prostate cancer screening decision aid called 'Making the best choice', in web and printed formats, which has been developed and tested by a workgroup from Georgetown University (USA).Methods and analysisCulturally and technically inappropriate recommendations in the original decision aid will be reviewed by the process coordinator and a linguistic expert. Two forward translations from English to Portuguese will be done, followed by a back-translation and an independent expert review. We will further improve the decision aid through an iterative process of data collection, data analysis and decision aid review. Individual semistructured cognitive interviews will be conducted and audiotaped with 55-69-year-old men recruited from the local community (urban and suburban) of Oporto district. We plan a total sample size of 30 participants (15 interviews per format). All participants will receive written information about the study and will sign individual consent forms. After verbatim transcription of the audiofiles, a thematic categorical analysis will be conducted using Ligre Software.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Health Ethics Committee from Centro Hospitalar de São João/Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto. Results from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and the Portuguese decision aid will available to Portuguese men.
| S-EPMC6797286 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Informed decision making has been highlighted as an important aspect of lung cancer screening programs. This study seeks to assess the efficacy of a web-based patient decision aid for lung cancer screening, www.shouldiscreen.com.A before-and-after study (August through December 2014) was conducted where participants navigated a web-based decision aid that provided information about low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening. Using an established prediction model, the decision aid computed baseline lung cancer risk and an individual's chances of benefiting from, and risk of being harmed by, screening. Outcome measures included knowledge of lung cancer risk factors and lung cancer screening, decisional conflict, concordance, and acceptability of the decision aid. Data were collected from 60 participants who were current or former smokers, had no history of lung cancer, and had not received a chest computed tomographic scan in the previous year. Analysis took place in 2015.Knowledge increased after seeing the decision aid compared with before (p<0.001), whereas the score on the Decisional Conflict Scale decreased (p<0.001). Concordance between a participant's preference to screen and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation improved after seeing the decision aid (p<0.001). Risk perceptions among the screen-ineligible group changed (n=49), contrary to those who were eligible (n=11). Ninety-seven percent of the participants reported that the decision aid was likely useful for lung cancer screening decision making.The web-based decision aid should be a helpful resource for individuals considering lung cancer screening, as well as for practitioners and health systems with lung cancer screening programs.
| S-EPMC5544524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWeb-based tools developed to facilitate a shared decision-making (SDM) process may facilitate the implementation of lung cancer screening (LCS), an evidence-based intervention to improve cancer outcomes. Veterans have specific risk factors and shared experiences that affect the benefits and potential harms of LCS and thus may value a veteran-centric LCS decision tool (LCSDecTool).ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct usability testing of an LCSDecTool designed for veterans receiving care at a Veteran Affairs medical center.MethodsUsability testing of the LCSDecTool was conducted in a prototype version (phase 1) and a high-fidelity version (phase 2). A total of 18 veterans and 8 clinicians participated in phase 1, and 43 veterans participated in phase 2. Quantitative outcomes from the users included the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the End User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) in phase 1 and the SUS, EUCS, and Patient Engagement scale in phase 2. Qualitative data were obtained from observations of user sessions and brief interviews. The results of phase 1 informed the modifications of the prototype for the high-fidelity version. Phase 2 usability testing took place in the context of a pilot hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial.ResultsIn the phase 1 prototype usability testing, the mean SUS score (potential range: 0-100) was 81.90 (SD 9.80), corresponding to an excellent level of usability. The mean EUCS score (potential range: 1-5) was 4.30 (SD 0.71). In the phase 2 high-fidelity usability testing, the mean SUS score was 65.76 (SD 15.23), corresponding to a good level of usability. The mean EUCS score was 3.91 (SD 0.95); and the mean Patient Engagement scale score (potential range 1 [low] to 5 [high]) was 4.62 (SD 0.67). The median time to completion in minutes was 13 (IQR 10-16). A thematic analysis of user statements documented during phase 2 high-fidelity usability testing identified the following themes: a low baseline level of awareness and knowledge about LCS increased after use of the LCSDecTool; users sought more detailed descriptions about the LCS process; the LCSDecTool was generally easy to use, but specific navigation challenges remained; some users noted difficulty understanding medical terms used in the LCSDecTool; and use of the tool evoked veterans' struggles with prior attempts at smoking cessation.ConclusionsOur findings support the development and use of this eHealth technology in the primary care clinical setting as a way to engage veterans, inform them about a new cancer control screening test, and prepare them to participate in an SDM discussion with their provider.
| S-EPMC9034418 | biostudies-literature