Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 May 10;5(5):CD013822.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013822.pub2.

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

Paula Riganti  1 , M Victoria Ruiz Yanzi  1 , Camila Micaela Escobar Liquitay  2 , Nadia J Sgarbossa  3 , Christoper A Alarcon-Ruiz  4 , Karin S Kopitowski  1 , Juan Va Franco  5
Affiliations
Review

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

Paula Riganti et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: In breast cancer screening programmes, women may have discussions with a healthcare provider to help them decide whether or not they wish to join the breast cancer screening programme. This process is called shared decision-making (SDM) and involves discussions and decisions based on the evidence and the person's values and preferences. SDM is becoming a recommended approach in clinical guidelines, extending beyond decision aids. However, the overall effect of SDM in women deciding to participate in breast cancer screening remains uncertain.

Objectives: To assess the effect of SDM on women's satisfaction, confidence, and knowledge when deciding whether to participate in breast cancer screening.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 8 August 2023. We also screened abstracts from two relevant conferences from 2020 to 2023.

Selection criteria: We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing interventions targeting various components of SDM. The focus was on supporting women aged 40 to 75 at average or above-average risk of breast cancer in their decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. Review outcomes included satisfaction with the decision-making process, confidence in the decision made, knowledge of all options, adherence to the chosen option, women's involvement in SDM, woman-clinician communication, and mental health.

Main results: We identified 19 studies with 64,215 randomised women, mostly with an average to moderate risk of breast cancer. Two studies covered all aspects of SDM; six examined shortened forms of SDM involving communication on risks and personal values; and 11 focused on enhanced communication of risk without other SDM aspects. SDM involving all components compared to control The two eligible studies did not assess satisfaction with the SDM process or confidence in the decision. Based on a single study, SDM showed uncertain effects on participant knowledge regarding the age to start screening (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.28; 133 women; very low certainty evidence) and frequency of testing (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.04; 133 women; very low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Abbreviated forms of SDM with clarification of values and preferences compared to control Of the six included studies, none evaluated satisfaction with the SDM process. These interventions may reduce conflict in the decision made, based on two measures, Decisional Conflict Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -4.21 to 0.87; conflict scale from 0 to 100; 4 studies; 1714 women; very low certainty evidence) and the proportion of women with residual conflict compared to control at one to three months' follow-up (rate of women with a conflicted decision, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99; 1 study; 1001 women, very low certainty evidence). Knowledge of all options was assessed through knowledge scores and informed choice. The effect of SDM may enhance knowledge (MDs ranged from 0.47 to 1.44 higher scores on a scale from 0 to 10; 5 studies; 2114 women; low certainty evidence) and may lead to higher rates of informed choice (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; 4 studies; 2449 women; low certainty evidence) compared to control at one to three months' follow-up. These interventions may result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.54, 95% -0.96 to 2.14; scale from 20 to 80; 2 studies; 749 women; low certainty evidence) and the number of women with worries about cancer compared to control at four to six weeks' follow-up (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 1 study, 639 women; low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Enhanced communication about risks without other SDM aspects compared to control Of 11 studies, three did not report relevant outcomes for this review, and none assessed satisfaction with the SDM process. Confidence in the decision made was measured by decisional conflict and anticipated regret of participating in screening or not. These interventions, without addressing values and preferences, may result in lower confidence in the decision compared to regular communication strategies at two weeks' follow-up (MD 2.89, 95% CI -2.35 to 8.14; Decisional Conflict Scale from 0 to 100; 2 studies; 1191 women; low certainty evidence). They may result in higher anticipated regret if participating in screening (MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41) and lower anticipated regret if not participating in screening (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). These interventions increase knowledge (MD 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.62; scale from 0 to 10; 4 studies; 2510 women; high certainty evidence), while it is unclear if there is a higher rate of informed choice compared to regular communication strategies at two to four weeks' follow-up (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.92; 2 studies; 1805 women; low certainty evidence). These interventions result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.33, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.99; scale from 20 to 80) and depression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.45; scale from 0 to 21; 2 studies; 1193 women; high certainty evidence) and lower cancer worry compared to control (MD -0.17, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.08; scale from 1 to 4; 1 study; 838 women; high certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured.

Authors' conclusions: Studies using abbreviated forms of SDM and other forms of enhanced communications indicated improvements in knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. However, uncertainty remains about the effect of SDM on supporting women's decisions. Most studies did not evaluate outcomes considered important for this review topic, and those that did measured different concepts. High-quality randomised trials are needed to evaluate SDM in diverse cultural settings with a focus on outcomes such as women's satisfaction with choices aligned to their values.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00247442 NCT04741503 NCT01361035 NCT04948983.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

PR, MVRY, KSK, and JVAF have published commentaries, taught, and conducted research related to shared‐decision making. With a grant from the Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, we developed a decision aid for breast cancer screening: decidirmamografia.com.ar/. The development paper and alpha testing of this tool (acceptability and usability, not an implementation study) was submitted for publication and is under review. We have no commercial interest or revenue from this decision aid.

CMEL: none known.

NJS: none known.

CAR: EviSalud ‐ Evidencias en Salud (other business ownership). This online platform provides courses related to evidence‐based medicine and research methods. There are no direct or indirect relationships with the review topic.

JVAF is Managing Editor for the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group, Clinical Editor for the Cochrane Urology Group, and Cochrane's Governing Board member. He was not involved in the editorial process of this review. The views of this manuscript do not represent the views of the Cochrane Governing Board, as JVAF has an authoring role in this manuscript.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Shared decision‐making (all components) versus control, Outcome 1: Knowledge
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 1: Confidence ‐ decisional conflict ‐ continuous
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 2: Confidence ‐ decisional conflict ‐ dichotomous
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 3: Confidence ‐ regret/anticipated regret
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 4: Knowledge ‐ continuous
2.5
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 5: Knowledge ‐ informed choice (composite of knowledge, attitudes and intentions)
2.6
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 6: Knowledge ‐ dichotomous (correct answers)
2.7
2.7. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 7: Anxiety ‐ continuous
2.8
2.8. Analysis
Comparison 2: Some components of shared decision‐making, including clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 8: Anxiety ‐ dichotomous
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 1: Confidence
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 2: Confidence ‐ long‐term follow‐up
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 3: Knowledge ‐ continuous
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 4: Knowledge ‐ continuous ‐ long term
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 5: Knowledge ‐ informed choice (composite of knowledge, attitudes and intentions)
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 6: Knowledge ‐ dichotomous (correct answers)
3.7
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 7: Anxiety and depression
3.8
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 8: Anxiety and depression ‐ long term
3.9
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 9: Cancer worry
3.10
3.10. Analysis
Comparison 3: Studies focused only on enhanced communication, without clarification of values and preferences, versus control, Outcome 10: Cancer worry ‐ long term
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Akbari 2020 {published data only}
    1. Akbari Z, Mehrabi E, Mirghafourvand M, Nourizadeh R. The effect of decision aid on breast cancer screening behaviors based on theory of stage of change: an interventional study. Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences 2020;7(3):404‐8.
Baena‐Cañada 2015 {published data only}
    1. Baena-Cañada JM, Rosado-Varela P, Expósito-Álvarez I, González-Guerrero M, Nieto-Vera J, Benítez-Rodríguez E. Using an informed consent in mammography screening: a randomized trial. Cancer Medicine 2015;4(12):1923‐32. - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT01335906. Evidence-informed choice for women participating in mammography screening. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01335906 (first received 15 April 2011).
Bourmaud 2016 {published data only}
    1. Bourmaud A, Soler-Michel P, Oriol M, Regnier V, Tinquaut F, Nourissat A, et al. Decision aid on breast cancer screening reduces attendance rate: results of a large-scale, randomized, controlled study by the DECIDEO group. Oncotarget 2016;7(11):12885‐92. [PMID: 10.18632/oncotarget.7332] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT02093039. Informed decision users of the health system and participation in organized screening for breast cancer. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02093039 (first received 20 March 2014).
Elliot 2022 {published data only}
    1. Elliott TE, Asche SE, O'Connor PJ, Dehmer SP, Ekstrom HL, Truitt AR, et al. Clinical decision support with or without shared decision making to improve preventive cancer care: a cluster-randomized trial. Medical Decision Making 2022;42(6):808-21. [DOI: 10.1177/0272989X221082083] [PMID: ] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Elliott TE, O'Connor PJ, Asche SE, Saman DM, Dehmer SP, Ekstrom HL, et al. Design and rationale of an intervention to improve cancer prevention using clinical decision support and shared decision making: A clinic-randomized trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2021;102:106271. [DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106271] [PMID: ] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Giordano 2012 {published data only}
    1. Giordano L, Stefanini V, Senore C, Frigerio A, Castagno R, Marra V, et al. The impact of different communication and organizational strategies on mammography screening uptake in women aged 40-45 years. European Journal of Public Health 2012;22(3):413‐8. [DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckr090] - DOI - PubMed
Gummersbach 2015 {published data only}
    1. DRKS00004271. What influence do information brochures have on the decision-making of women to take part in mammographic screening? https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRI... (first received 27 August 2012).
    1. Gummersbach E, in der Schmitten J, Abholz HH, Wegscheider K, Pentzek M. Effects of different information brochures on women's decision-making regarding mammography screening: study protocol for a randomized controlled questionnaire study. Trials 2013;14:319. [DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-319] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gummersbach E, in der Schmitten J, Mortsiefer A, Abholz HH, Wegscheider K, Pentzek M. Willingness to participate in mammography screening: a randomized controlled questionnaire study of responses to two patient information leaflets with different factual content. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 2015;112(5):61‐8. [DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2015.0061] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Haakenson 2006 {published data only}
    1. Haakenson CP, Vickers KS, Cha SS, Vachon CM, Thielen JM, Kircher KJ, et al. Efficacy of a simple, low-cost educational intervention in improving knowledge about risks and benefits of screening mammography. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2006;81(6):783‐91. [DOI: 10.4065/81.6.783] - DOI - PubMed
Hersch 2021 {published data only}
    1. Hersch J, Barratt A, Jansen J, Houssami N, Irwig L, Jacklyn G, et al. The effect of information about overdetection of breast cancer on women's decision-making about mammography screening: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2014;4(5):e004990. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hersch J, Barratt A, Jansen J, Irwig L, McGeechan K, Jacklyn G, et al. Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;385(9978):1642-52. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60123-4.] - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hersch J, Barratt A, Jansen J, McGeechan K, Dhillon H, Jacklyn G, et al. Informing women about overdetection in breast cancer screening: randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up. Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology 2017;13:83‐4.
    1. Hersch J, Barratt A, McGeechan K, Jansen J, Houssami N, Dhillon H, et al. Informing women about overdetection in breast cancer screening: two-year outcomes from a randomized trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2021;113(11):1523-30. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djab083] [PMID: ] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Dhillon H, et al. Overdetection information in a breast cancer screening decision aid: randomized controlled trial with 12-month follow-up. Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology 2016;12:101.
Kregting 2020 {published data only}
    1. Kregting LM, Ravesteyn NT, Spijker W, Dierks T, Aitken CA, Geuzinge HA, et al. Effects of a leaflet on breast cancer screening knowledge, explicit attitudes, and implicit associations. Patient Education and Counseling 2020;S0738-3991(20):30350-5. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.06.032] - DOI - PubMed
Mathieu 2007 {published data only}12605000695606
    1. Mathieu E, Barratt A, Davey HM, McGeechan K, Howard K, Houssami N. Informed choice in mammography screening: a randomized trial of a decision aid for 70-year-old women. JAMA Internal Medicine 2007;167(19):2039‐46. - PubMed
Mathieu 2010 {published data only}
    1. Mathieu E, Barratt AL, McGeechan K, Davey HM, Howard K, Houssami N. Helping women make choices about mammography screening: an online randomized trial of a decision aid for 40-year-old women. Patient Education and Counseling 2010;81(1):63‐72. - PubMed
    1. NCT00139048. Australian screening mammography decision aid trial: a decision aid for women aged 40 thinking about starting mammography screening. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT00139048 (first received 30 August 2005).
NCT04741503 {unpublished data only}
    1. NCT04741503. Project insight: feasibility of a breast cancer screening decision support tool. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04741503 (first received 5 February 2021).
Pérez‐Lacasta 2019 {published data only}
    1. Carles M, Martínez-Alonso M, Pons A, Pérez-Lacasta MJ, Perestelo-Pérez L, Sala M, et al. The effect of information about the benefits and harms of mammography on women's decision-making: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2017;18(1):426. - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT03046004. Effect of information about the benefits and harms of mammography on women's decision making. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03046004 (first received 8 February 2017).
    1. Pons-Rodríguez A, Martínez-Alonso M, Perestelo-Pérez L, Garcia M, Sala M, Rué M. [Informed choice in breast cancer screening: the role of education]. Gaceta Sanitaria 2020;35(3):243-9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2020.01.002] - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pérez-Lacasta MJ, Martínez-Alonso M, Garcia M, Sala M, Perestelo-Pérez L, Vidal C, et al. Effect of information about the benefits and harms of mammography on women's decision making: the InforMa randomised controlled trial. PLoS One 2019;14(3):e0214057. - PMC - PubMed
Price‐Haywood 2014 {published data only}
    1. Price-Haywood EG, Harden-Barrios J, Cooper LA. Comparative effectiveness of audit-feedback versus additional physician communication training to improve cancer screening for patients with limited health literacy. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2014;29(8):1113‐21. [DOI: 10.1007/s11606-014-2782-4] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Price-Haywood EG, Harden-Barrios J, Cooper LA. Health information needs and predictors of cancer screening status among patients with limited health literacy. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 2011;20(10):A11.
Reder 2017 {published data only}
    1. DRKS00005176. Development and testing of a decision aid for mammography screening. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRI... (first received 29 July 2013).
    1. Reder M, Kolip P. Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Results from a randomised controlled trial. PLoS ONE 2017;12(12):e0189148. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reder M, Kolip P. Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Womens Health 2015;15:53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reder M, Soellner R, Kolip P. Do women with high ehealth literacy profit more from a decision aid on mammography screening? Testing the moderation effect of the eHEALS in a randomized controlled trial. Frontiers Public Health 2019;7:46. [DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00046] [PMID: ] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Rimer 2002 {published data only}
    1. Rimer BK, Halabi S, Sugg Skinner C, Lipkus IM, Strigo TS, Kaplan EB, et al. Effects of a mammography decision-making intervention at 12 and 24 months. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2002;22(4):247‐57. - PubMed
Roberto 2020 {published data only}
    1. NCT03097653. Decision-aid on breast cancer screening. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03097653 (first received 31 March 2017).
    1. Roberto A, Colombo C, Candiani G, Giordano L, Mantellini P, Paci E, et al. Personalised informed choice on evidence and controversy on mammography screening: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2017;17(1):429. [DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3428-9] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roberto A, Colombo C, Candiani G, Giordano L, Mantellini P, Paci E, et al. [Decision aid and informed decision on breast cancer screening: the "DonnaInformata-Mammografia" project.]. Recenti Progressi in Medicina 2018;109(2):139-42. - PubMed
    1. Roberto A, Colombo C, Candiani G, Satolli R, Giordano L, Jaramillo L, et al. A dynamic web-based decision aid to improve informed choice in organised breast cancer screening. A pragmatic randomised trial in Italy. British Journal of Cancer 2020;123(5):714-21. [DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0935-2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Schapira 2019 {published data only}
    1. NCT01879189. PROSPR/PCIPS project 3: communication of personalized breast cancer risk. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01879189 (first received 17 June 2013).
    1. Schapira MM, Hubbard R, Seitz H, Conant E, Schnall M, Capella J, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a risk based mammography screening decision aid for women 39-48 years of age. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2016;31(2):S105.
    1. Schapira MM, Hubbard RA, Seitz HH, Conant EF, Schnall M, Cappella JN, et al. The Impact of a risk-based breast cancer screening decision aid on initiation of mammography among younger women: report of a randomized trial. MDM Policy & Practice 2019;4(1):2381468318812889. [DOI: 10.1177/2381468318812889] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Seitz 2016 {published data only}
    1. Seitz HH, Gibson L, Skubisz C, Forquer H, Mello S, Schapira MM, et al. Effects of a risk-based online mammography intervention on accuracy of perceived risk and mammography intentions. Patient Education and Counseling 2016;99(10):1647‐56. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Allen 2014 {published data only}
    1. Allen JD, Pérez JE, Tom L, Leyva B, Diaz D, Idalí Torres M. A pilot test of a church-based intervention to promote multiple cancer-screening behaviors among Latinas. Journal of Cancer Education 2014;29(1):136-43. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Allgood 2016 {published data only}
    1. Allgood PC, Maxwell AJ, Hudson S, Offman J, Hutchison G, Beattie C, et al. A randomised trial of the effect of postal reminders on attendance for breast screening. British Journal of Cancer 2016;114(2):171‐6. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Beauchamp 2020 {published data only}
    1. Beauchamp A, Mohebbi M, Cooper A, Pridmore V, Livingston P, Scanlon M, et al. The impact of translated reminder letters and phone calls on mammography screening booking rates: two randomised controlled trials. PLoS One 2020;15(1):e0226610. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Boling 2005 {published data only}
    1. Boling W, Laufman L, Lynch GR, Weinberg AD. Increasing mammography screening through inpatient education. Journal of Cancer Education 2005;20(4):247-50. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Borrayo 2005 {published data only}
    1. Borrayo EA, Lawsin C, Coit C. Latinas' appraisal of participation in breast cancer prevention clinical trials. Cancer control: journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center 2005;12(Suppl 2):107-10. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Bouton 2012 {published data only}
    1. Bouton ME, Shirah GR, Nodora J, Pond E, Hsu C-H, Klemens AE, et al. Implementation of educational video improves patient understanding of basic breast cancer concepts in an undereducated county hospital population. Journal of Surgical Oncology 2012;105(1):48-54. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Bowen 2006 {published data only}
    1. Bowen DJ, Powers D, Greenlee H. Effects of breast cancer risk counseling for sexual minority women. Health Care for Women International 2006;27(1):59‐74. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Bowen 2017 {published data only}
    1. Bowen DJ, Robbins R, Bush N, Meischke H, Ludwig A, Wooldridge J. Effects of a web-based intervention on women's breast health behaviors. Translational Behavioral Medicine 2017;7(2):309‐19. - PMC - PubMed
Bowles 2021 {published data only}
    1. Bowles EJA, O'Neill SC, Li T, Knerr S, Mandelblatt JS, Schwartz MD, et al. Effect of a randomized trial of a web-based intervention on patient-provider communication about breast density. Journal of Women's Health 2021;30(11):1529-37. [DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2021.0053] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Knerr S, Wernli KJ, Leppig K, Ehrlich K, Graham AL, Farrell D, et al. A web-based personalized risk communication and decision-making tool for women with dense breasts: design and methods of a randomized controlled trial within an integrated health care system. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2017;56:25‐33. - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT03029286. ENGAGED 2 study: experiences with mammography screening and breast density 2. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03029286 (first received 24 January 2017).
Coronado 2016 {published data only}
    1. Coronado GD, Beresford SA, McLerran D, Jimenez R, Patrick DL, Ornelas I, et al. Multilevel intervention raises latina participation in mammography screening: findings from fortaleza Latina! Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2016;25(4):584-92. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coronado GD, Jimenez R, Martinez-Gutierrez J, McLerran D, Ornelas I, Patrick D, et al. Multi-level intervention to increase participation in mammography screening: ¡Fortaleza Latina! study design. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2014;38(2):350‐4. - PMC - PubMed
Curry 1993 {published data only}
    1. Curry SJ, Taplin SH, Anderman C, Barlow WE, McBride C. A randomized trial of the impact of risk assessment and feedback on participation in mammography screening. Preventive Medicine 1993;22(3):350‐60. - PubMed
Davey 2005 {published data only}
    1. Davey C, White V, Gattellari M, Ward JE. Reconciling population benefits and women's individual autonomy in mammographic screening: In-depth interviews to explore women's views about 'informed choice'. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2005;29(1):69-77. - PubMed
del Junco 2008 {published data only}
    1. Junco DJ, Vernon SW, Coan SP, Tiro JA, Bastian LA, Savas LS, et al. Promoting regular mammography screening I. A systematic assessment of validity in a randomized trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2008;100(5):333‐46. - PMC - PubMed
DuBenske 2017 {published data only}
    1. DuBenske LL, Schrager S, McDowell H, Wilke LG, Trentham-Dietz A, Burnside ES. Mammography screening: gaps in patient's and physician's needs for shared decision-making. The Breast Journal 2017;23(2):210-4. - PMC - PubMed
Eden 2015 {published data only}
    1. Eden KB, Scariati P, Klein K, Watson L, Remiker M, Hribar M, et al. Mammography decision aid reduces decisional conflict for women in their forties considering screening. Journal of Women's Health 2015;24(12):1013-20. - PMC - PubMed
Elkin 2017 {published data only}
    1. Elkin EB, Pocus VH, Mushlin AI, Cigler T, Atoria CL, Polaneczky MM. Facilitating informed decisions about breast cancer screening: development and evaluation of a web-based decision aid for women in their 40s. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2017;17(1):29. - PMC - PubMed
Fagerlin 2005 {published data only}
    1. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. How making a risk estimate can change the feel of that risk: shifting attitudes toward breast cancer risk in a general public survey. Patient Education and Counseling 2005;57(3):294‐9. - PubMed
Fechtelpeter 2019 {published data only}
    1. Fechtelpeter D, Büchter R, Schröer-Günther M, Meurer R, Zschorlich B, Koch K. 22 Decision aids for organized cancer screening in Germany. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2019;24:A15-6.
Fernández‐Feito 2015 {published data only}
    1. Fernández-Feito A, Lana A, Baldonedo-Cernuda R, Mosteiro-Díaz MP. A brief nursing intervention reduces anxiety before breast cancer screening mammography. Psicothema 2015;27(2):128‐33. - PubMed
Fiscella 2011 {published data only}
    1. Fiscella K, Humiston S, Hendren S, Winters P, Idris A, Li SX, et al. A multimodal intervention to promote mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a safety-net practice. Journal of the National Medical Assocciation 103;8:762-8. [PMID: ] - PubMed
    1. Fiscella K, Yosha A, Hendren SK, Humiston S, Winters P, Ford P, et al. Get screened: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to increase mammography and colorectal cancer screening in a large, safety net practice. BMC Health Services Research 2010;10:280. - PMC - PubMed
Fredrick 2020 {published data only}
    1. Fredrick CM, Linskens RJ, Schilling MA, Eggen AT, Strickland RA, Jacobs EA. The cancer clear & simple story: developing a cancer prevention curriculum for rural Wisconsin through a community partnership. Journal of Cancer Education 2020;37:338-42. - PMC - PubMed
Geller 2007 {published data only}
    1. Geller BM, Zapka J, Hofvind SS-H, Scharpantgen A, Giordano L, Ohuchi N, et al. Communicating with women about mammography. Journal of Cancer Education 2007;22(1):25-31. - PubMed
Ghosh 2008 {published data only}
    1. Ghosh K, Crawford BJ, Pruthi S, Williams CI, Neal L, Sandhu NP, et al. Frequency format diagram and probability chart for breast cancer risk communication: a prospective, randomized trial. BMC Women's Health 2008;8:18. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Gibbons 2018 {published data only}
    1. Gibbons KC, Harkless GE. The evaluation of a breast cancer screening decision aid in the community setting. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2018;23:A38.
Goel 2011 {published data only}
    1. Goel MS, Gracia G, Baker DW. Development and pilot testing of a culturally sensitive multimedia program to improve breast cancer screening in Latina women. Patient Education and Counseling 2011;84(1):128-31. - PubMed
Goldzahl 2018 {published data only}
    1. Goldzahl L, Hollard G, Jusot F. Increasing breast-cancer screening uptake: a randomized controlled experiment. Journal of Health Economics 2018;58:228‐52. - PubMed
Haas 2019 {published data only}
    1. Haas JS, Giess CS, Harris KA, Ansolabehere J, Kaplan CP. Randomized trial of personalized breast density and breast cancer risk notification. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2019;34(4):591‐7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT02986360. Informed implementation of breast density reporting. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02986360 (first received 8 December 2016).
Hersch 2014 {published data only}
    1. Hersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Jacklyn G, et al. Overdetection in breast cancer screening: Development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid. BMJ Open 2014;4(9):e006016. - PMC - PubMed
Hurdle 2007 {published data only}
    1. Hurdle DE. Breast cancer prevention with older women: a gender-focused intervention study. Health Care for Women International 2007;28(10):872‐87. - PubMed
ISRCTN15366380 {published data only}
    1. ISRCTN15366380. The effect of using emotive language in information about over-diagnosis in cancer screening on knowledge, attitudes and screening intentions. isrctn.com/ISRCTN15366380 (first received 24 June 2015).
Kearins 2009 {published data only}
    1. Kearins O, Walton J, O'Sullivan E, Lawrence G. Invitation management initiative to improve uptake of breast cancer screening in an urban UK Primary Care Trust. Journal of Medical Screening 2009;16(2):81-4. - PubMed
Kernohan 1996 {published data only}
    1. Kernohan EEM. Evaluation of a pilot study for breast and cervical cancer screening with Bradford's minority ethnic women; a community development approach, 1991-93. British Journal of Cancer 1996;74(Suppl 29):S42-6. - PMC - PubMed
Krist 2017 {published data only}
    1. Krist AH, Woolf SH, Hochheimer C, Sabo RT, Kashiri P, Jones RM, et al. Harnessing information technology to inform patients facing routine decisions: cancer screening as a test case. Annals of family medicine 2017;15(3):217-24. - PMC - PubMed
Larkey 2012 {published data only}
    1. Larkey LK, Herman PM, Roe DJ, Garcia F, Lopez AM, Gonzalez J, et al. A cancer screening intervention for underserved Latina women by lay educators. Journal of Women's Health 2012;21(5):557‐66. - PubMed
Lawrence 2000 {published data only}
    1. Lawrence VA, Streiner D, Hazuda HP, Naylor R, Levine M, Gafni A. A cross-cultural consumer-based decision aid for screening mammography. Preventive Medicine 2000;30(3):200-8. - PubMed
Lerman 1994 {published data only}
    1. Lerman C, Rimer BK, Daly M, Lustbader E, Sands C, Balshem A, et al. Recruiting high risk women into a breast cancer health promotion trial. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 1994;3(3):271-6. - PubMed
Lewis 2003 {published data only}
    1. Lewis CL, Pignone MP, Sheridan SL, Downs SM, Kinsinger LS. A randomized trial of three videos that differ in the framing of information about mammography in women 40 to 49 years old. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2003;18(11):875‐83. - PMC - PubMed
Lippey 2022 {published data only}
    1. Lippey J, Keogh L, Campbell I, Mann GB, Forrest L. Development and pilot testing of an online decision aid for women considering risk-stratified breast screening. Journal of Community Genetics 2022;13(1):137-41. - PMC - PubMed
Lo 2018 {published data only}
    1. Lo LL, Collins IM, Bressel M, Butow P, Emery J, Keogh L, et al. The iPrevent online breast cancer risk assessment and risk management tool: usability and acceptability testing. JMIR Formative Research 2018;2(2):e24. - PMC - PubMed
Luckmann 2019 {published data only}
    1. Luckmann R, Costanza ME, White MJ, Frisard CF, Rosal M, Sama S, et al. A 4-year randomized trial comparing three outreach interventions to promote screening mammograms. Translational Behavioral Medicine 2019;9(2):328‐35. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Luckmann R, White MJ, Costanza ME, Frisard CF, Cranos C, Sama S, et al. Implementation and process evaluation of three interventions to promote screening mammograms delivered for 4 years in a large primary care population. Translational Behavioral Medicine 2017;7(3):547‐56. - PMC - PubMed
Mambourg 2018 {published data only}
    1. Mambourg F, Kohn L. Breast cancer screening: a tool for informed decision making. Revue Medicale de Bruxelles 2018;39(4):410-5. - PubMed
Mann 2000 {published data only}
    1. Mann BD, Sherman L, Clayton C, Johnson RF, Keates J, Kasenge R, et al. Screening to the converted: an educational intervention in African American churches. Journal of Cancer Education 2000;15(1):46-50. - PubMed
Molina 2018 {published data only}
    1. Molina Y, Kim SJ, Berrios N, Glassgow AE, San Miguel Y, Darnell JS, et al. Patient navigation improves subsequent breast cancer screening after a noncancerous result: evidence from the patient navigation in medically underserved areas study. Journal of Women's Health (2002) 2018;27(3):317‐23. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
    1. Molina Y, San Miguel LG, Tamayo L, Robledo C, Díaz CS, Lucio A, et al. The "Empowering Latinas to Obtain Breast Cancer Screenings" study: rationale and design. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2018;71:1‐8. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Narasimmaraj 2016 {published data only}
    1. Narasimmaraj PR, Stover Fiscalini A, Kaplan CP, Van't Veer LJ, Hallada AM, Thompson CK, et al. A pilot feasibility study of the WISDOM study, a preference-tolerant randomized controlled trial evaluating a risk-based breast cancer screening strategy. Cancer Research 2016;76(4):P3-10-01.
NCT00150917 {published data only}
    1. NCT00150917. RCT of a group intervention for women with a family history of breast cancer. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00150917 (first received 8 September 2005).
NCT00247442 {published data only}
    1. NCT00247442. Australian screening mammography decision aid trial (ASMDAT). clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00247442 (first received 1 November 2005). [ACTRN: 12605000695606]
NCT01336257 {published data only}
    1. NCT01336257. Effectiveness of a decision support system in improving the diagnosis and screening rate of breast cancer. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01336257 (first received 15 April 2011).
NCT02964234 {published data only}
    1. NCT02964234. Empowering Latinas to obtain breast cancer screenings. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02964234 (first received 16 November 2016).
NCT02986230 {published data only}
    1. NCT02986230. Cancer prevention clinical decision support. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02986230 (first received 8 December 2016).
NCT04601272 {published data only}
    1. NCT04601272. Evaluating the shared decision making process scale in cancer screening decisions. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04601272 (first received 23 October 2020).
Orlando 2018 {published data only}
    1. Orlando LA, Wu RR, Buchanan A, Myers RA, Ginsburg GS. The intersection of population health and precision medicine: employing technology to optimize risk assessment in primary care. BMC Health Services Research 2018;33(2):367. [PMID: ]
Percefull 2020 {published data only}
    1. Percefull J, Butler J. Improving mammography through effective screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment at a rural health center. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners 2020;33(4):324-30. - PubMed
Petrova 2015 {published data only}
    1. Petrova D, Garcia-Retamero R, Cokely ET. Understanding the harms and benefits of cancer screening: a model of factors that shape informed decision making. Medical Decision Making 2015;35(7):847-58. - PubMed
Phillips 2018 {published data only}
    1. Phillips K-A, Lo L, Bressel M, Collins IM, Emery J, Weideman P, et al. Acceptability and usability of iPrevent, a web-based decision support tool for assessment and management of breast cancer risk. Cancer Research 2018;78(4):P4-11-02.
Reder 2018 {published data only}
    1. Reder M, Thygesen LC. Crowd-figure-pictograms improve women's knowledge about mammography screening: results from a randomised controlled trial. BMC Research Notes 2018;11(1):332. - PMC - PubMed
Ruffin 2004 {published data only}
    1. Ruffin MT, Gorenflo DW. Interventions fail to increase cancer screening rates in community-based primary care practices. Preventive Medicine 2004;39(3):435‐40. - PubMed
Russell 2007 {published data only}
    1. Russell KM, Champion VL, Monahan PO, Millon-Underwood S, Zhao Q, Spacey N, et al. Randomized trial of a lay health advisor and computer intervention to increase mammography screening in African American women. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2010;19(1):201-10. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Russell KM, Monahan P, Wagle A, Champion V. Differences in health and cultural beliefs by stage of mammography screening adoption in African American women. Cancer 2007;109(2 Suppl):386‐95. - PubMed
Saver 2017 {published data only}
    1. Saver BG, Mazor KM, Luckmann R, Cutrona SL, Hayes M, Gorodetsky T, et al. Persuasive interventions for controversial cancer screening recommendations: testing a novel approach to help patients make evidence-based decisions. Annals of Family Medicine 2017;15(1):48‐55. - PMC - PubMed
Saywell 2003 {published data only}
    1. Saywell RM, Champion VL, Zollinger TW, Maraj M, Skinner CS, Zoppi KA, et al. The cost effectiveness of 5 interventions to increase mammography adherence in a managed care population. American Journal of Managed Care 2003;9(1):33‐44. - PubMed
Scariati 2015 {published data only}
    1. Scariati P, Nelson L, Watson L, Bedrick S, Eden KB. Impact of a decision aid on reducing uncertainty: pilot study of women in their 40s and screening mammography. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2015;15:89. - PMC - PubMed
Schoenberg 2013 {published data only}
    1. Schoenberg NE, Studts CR, Hatcher-Keller J, Buelt E, Adams E. Patterns and determinants of breast and cervical cancer non-screening among Appalachian women. Women & Health 2013;53(6):552‐71. - PMC - PubMed
Schonberg 2020 {published data only}
    1. Schonberg MA, Davis RB, Karamourtopoulos MC, Pinheiro A, Sternberg SB, Jacobson AR, et al. A pre-test-post-test trial of a breast cancer risk report for women in their 40s. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2020;59(3):343-54. - PubMed
Segura 2001 {published data only}
    1. Segura JM, Castells X, Casamitjana M, Macià F, Porta M, Katz SJ. A randomized controlled trial comparing three invitation strategies in a breast cancer screening program. Preventive Medicine 2001;33(4):325‐32. - PubMed
Seven 2015 {published data only}
    1. Seven M, Akyüz A, Robertson LB. Interventional education methods for increasing women's participation in breast cancer screening program. Journal of Cancer Education 2015;30(2):244-52. - PubMed
Shieh 2017 {published data only}
    1. Shieh Y, Eklund M, Madlensky L, Sawyer SD, Thompson CK, Stover Fiscalini A, et al. Breast cancer screening in the precision medicine era: risk-based screening in a population-based trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2017;109(5):djw290. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Sinicrope 2020 {published data only}
    1. Sinicrope PS, Bauer MC, Patten CA, Austin-Garrison M, Garcia L, Hughes CA, et al. Development and evaluation of a cancer literacy intervention to promote mammography screening among Navajo women: a pilot study. American Journal of Health Promotion 2020;34(6):681-5. - PMC - PubMed
Slater 1998 {published data only}
    1. Slater JS, Ha CN, Malone ME, McGovern P, Madigan SD, Finnegan JR, et al. A randomized community trial to increase mammography utilization among low-income women living in public housing. Preventive Medicine 1998;27(6):862‐70. - PubMed
Smith 2020 {published data only}
    1. Smith J, Dodd R, Hersch J, Cvejic E, McCaffery K, Jansen J. The effect of different communication strategies about stopping cancer screening on inyention to screen and cancer anxiety: a randomised online study in older adults. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2019;24:A14. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith J, Dodd RH, Hersch J, Cvejic E, McCaffery K, Jansen J. Effect of different communication strategies about stopping cancer screening on screening intention and cancer anxiety: a randomised online trial of older adults in Australia. BMJ Open 2020;10(6):e034061. - PMC - PubMed
Stencel 2011 {published data only}
    1. Stencel A, Błazek M, Majkowicz M, Jaśkiewicz J. The impact of self-threatening health information, on the anxiety level amongst women participating in breast cancer screening program in Poland. Nowotwory 2011;61(5):433-8.
Stover 2017 {published data only}
    1. Stover Fiscalini A, Theiner S, Kaplan C, Sarrafan S, Sawyer S, Liang A, et al. Evaluating the feasibility of a web-based preference-tolerant randomized trial of risk-based vs. annual breast cancer screening: WISDOM study pilot. Cancer Research 2017;77(4):P5-02-03.
    1. Theiner S, Kaplan C, Sarrafan S, Cabrera J, Sawyer SD, Liang AS, et al. The WISDOM study pilot: evaluating a preference-tolerant RCT of risk-based vs. annual breast cancer screening. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2016;34:e13035.
Street 1998 {published data only}
    1. Street RL, Van Order A, Bramson R, Manning T. Preconsultation education promoting breast cancer screening: does the choice of media make a difference? Journal of Cancer Education 1998;13(3):152‐61. - PubMed
Taylor 1999 {published data only}
    1. Taylor V, Thompson B, Lessler D, Yasui Y, Montano D, Johnson KM, et al. A clinic-based mammography intervention targeting inner-city women. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1999;14(2):104‐11. - PubMed
Thompson 2002 {published data only}
    1. Thompson B, Thompson LA, Andersen MR, Hager S, Taylor V, Urban N. Costs and cost-effectiveness of a clinical intervention to increase mammography utilization in an inner city public health hospital. Preventive Medicine 2002;35(1):87‐96. - PubMed
Tobin 2022 {published data only}
    1. NCT02273206. Collaborative care to reduce depression and increase cancer screening among low-income urban women project (Prevention Care Manager 3 Project). clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02273206 (first received 23 October 2014).
    1. Tobin JN, Weiss ES, Cassells A, Lin T, Holder T, Carrozzi G, et al. A randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening and reduce depression among low-income women. Journal of Prevention and Health Promotion 2022;3(3):271-99. [DOI: 10.1177/26320770221096098] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Tolma 2016 {published data only}
    1. Tolma EL, Engelman K, Stoner JA, Thomas C, Joseph S, Li J, et al. The design of a multi-component intervention to promote screening mammography in an American Indian community: the Native Women's Health Project. AIMS Public Health 2016;3(4):933-55. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tolma EL, Engelman K, Thomas C, Joseph S, Stoner J, Li J, et al. Promoting screening mammography in an American Indian community in Oklahoma: the native women's health project. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention 2016;25(3):52-65.
    1. Tolma EL, Thomas C, Stoner J, Joseph S, Engelman K, Li J. Native women's health project: an innovative approach toward promoting screening mammography in an American Indian community in Oklahoma. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2015;24(10 Suppl 1):DISP14-A29.
Ufomata 2016 {published data only}
    1. Ufomata E, Huang Y, Corbelli J. An evidence-based patient handout for breast cancer screening shared decision making in primary care. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2016;31(2):S119.
Urban 1995 {published data only}
    1. Urban N, Taplin SH, Taylor VM, Peacock S, Anderson G, Conrad D, et al. Community organization to promote breast cancer screening among women ages 50-75. Preventive Medicine 1995;24(5):477‐84. - PubMed
Wegwarth 2018 {published data only}
    1. Wegwarth O, Widschwendter M, Cibula D, Sundström K, Portuesi R, Lein I, et al. What do European women know about their female cancer risks and cancer screening? A cross-sectional online intervention survey in five European countries. BMJ Open 2018;8(12):e023789. - PMC - PubMed
Wolosin 1990 {published data only}
    1. Wolosin RJ. Effect of appointment scheduling and reminder postcards on adherence to mammography recommendations. Journal of Family Practice 1990;30(5):542‐7. - PubMed
Wong 2015 {published data only}
    1. Wong IOL, Lam WWT, Wong CN, Cowling BJ, Leung GM, Fielding R. Towards informed decisions on breast cancer screening: development and pilot testing of a decision aid for Chinese women. Patient Education and Counseling 2015;98(8):961-9. - PubMed
Wu 2013 {published data only}
    1. Wu RR, Orlando LA, Himmel TL, Buchanan AH, Powell KP, Hauser ER, et al. Patient and primary care provider experience using a family health history collection, risk stratification, and clinical decision support tool: a type 2 hybrid controlled implementation-effectiveness trial. BMC Family Practice 2013;14:111. - PMC - PubMed
Yang 2020 {published data only}
    1. Yang EF, Shah DV, Burnside ES, Little TA, Garino N, Campbell CE. Framing the clinical encounter: shared decision-making, mammography screening, and decision satisfaction. Journal of Health Communication 2020;25:1-11. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

NCT02914197 {published data only}
    1. NCT02914197. Giving information on the risks and limitations of mammography screening (GIRLS). clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02914197 (first received 26 September 2016).
NCT03631758 {published data only}
    1. NCT03631758. Evaluating the impact of evidence-based information about mammography on breast cancer screening decisions. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03631758 (first received 15 August 2018).

References to ongoing studies

NCT04948983 {published data only}
    1. NCT04948983. The effect of a patient decision aids for breast cancer screening. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04948983 (first received 2 July 2021).

Additional references

Abbasgholizadeh‐Rahimi 2022
    1. Abbasgholizadeh-Rahimi S, Nguyen N, Alizadeh M, Poenaru D. Moving shared decision-making forward in Iran. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2022;171:62-7. - PubMed
Agbadjé 2022
    1. Agbadjé TT, Riganti P, Adisso EL, Adekpedjou R, Boucher A, Nunciaroni AT, et al. Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. PLOS ONE 2022;17(3):e0265401. - PMC - PubMed
Alarcón‐Yaquetto 2022
    1. Alarcón-Yaquetto DE, Ferrari A, Málaga G. The road to patient-centred care in Peru: the difficulties and opportunities to achieve participatory health care. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2022;171:113-6. - PubMed
Andrade 2018
    1. Andrade MA, Franco JVA, Sanclemente G, Kuah CY, Yu AM, Shpadaruk V, et al. Interventions for pruritus of unknown cause. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2018, Issue 9. Art. No: CD013128. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013128] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Autier 2011
    1. Autier P, Boniol M, Gavin A, Vatten LJ. Breast cancer mortality in neighbouring European countries with different levels of screening but similar access to treatment: trend analysis of WHO mortality database. BMJ 2011;343:d4411. - PMC - PubMed
Autier 2017
    1. Autier P, Boniol M, Koechlin A, Pizot C, Boniol M. Effectiveness of and overdiagnosis from mammography screening in the Netherlands: population based study. BMJ 2017;359:j5224. - PMC - PubMed
Barry 2012
    1. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making – the pinnacle of patient-centered care. New England Journal of Medicine 2012;366(9):780-1. - PubMed
Bleyer 2012
    1. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. New England Journal of Medicine 2012;367(21):1998-2005. - PubMed
Bray 2018
    1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2018;68(6):394-424. - PubMed
Caress 2005
    1. Caress A-L, Beaver K, Luker K, Campbell M, Woodcock A. Involvement in treatment decisions: what do adults with asthma want and what do they get? Results of a cross sectional survey. Thorax 2005;60(3):199-205. - PMC - PubMed
Charles 1997
    1. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Science & Medicine 1997;44(5):681-92. - PubMed
Coulter 2011
    1. Coulter A, Collins A. Making shared decision‐making a reality: no decision about me, without me. Available at www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/making-shared-decision-making-reality 2011.
Covidence [Computer program]
    1. Covidence. Melbourne, Australia: Veritas Health Innovation, accessed 21 February 2018. Available at covidence.org.
Croes 2020
    1. Croes KD, Jones NR, DuBenske LL, Schrager SB, Mahoney JE, Little TA, et al. Core elements of shared decision-making for women considering breast cancer screening: results of a modified delphi survey. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2020;35(6):1668-77. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Deeks 2022
    1. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG, editor(s). Chapter 10: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available at training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.3.
DuBenske 2017
    1. DuBenske LL, Schrager S, McDowell H, Wilke LG, Trentham-Dietz A, Burnside ES. Mammography screening: gaps in patient's and physician's needs for shared decision-making. The Breast Journal 2017;23(2):210-4. - PMC - PubMed
Duncan 2010
    1. Duncan E, Best C, Hagen S. Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. Art. No: CD007297. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Edwards 2003
    1. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Hood K, Robling M, Atwell C, Holmes-Rovner M, et al. The development of COMRADE—a patient-based outcome measure to evaluate the effectiveness of risk communication and treatment decision making in consultations. Patient Education and Counseling 2003;50(3):311-22. - PubMed
Elwyn 2003
    1. Elwyn G, Edwards A, Wensing M, Hood K, Atwell C, Grol R. Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement. Quality and Safety in Health Care 2003;12(2):93-9. - PMC - PubMed
Elwyn 2012
    1. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Kinnersley P, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2012;27(10):1361-7. - PMC - PubMed
Elwyn 2014
    1. Elwyn G, Dehlendorf C, Epstein RM, Marrin K, White J, Frosch DL. Shared decision making and motivational interviewing: achieving patient-centered care across the spectrum of health care problems. Annals of Family Medicine 2014;12(3):270-5. - PMC - PubMed
Evans 2007
    1. Evans DG, Howell A. Breast cancer risk-assessment models. Breast Cancer Research 2007;9(5):213. - PMC - PubMed
Ferron 2013
    1. Ferron Parayre A, Labrecque M, Rousseau M, Turcotte S, Légaré F. Validation of SURE, a four-item clinical checklist for detecting decisional conflict in patients. Medical Decision Making 2013;34(1):54-62. - PubMed
Flemyng 2023
    1. Flemyng E, Moore TH, Boutron I, Higgins JPT, Hróbjartsson A, Hansen Nejstgaard C, et al. Using Risk of Bias 2 to assess results from randomised controlled trials: guidance from Cochrane. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2023;28(4):260-6. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112102] - DOI - PubMed
Franco 2018
    1. Franco JVA, Turk T, Jung JH, Xiao YT, Iakhno S, Garrote V, et al. Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2018, Issue 1. Art. No: CD012551. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012551.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Gao 2021
    1. Gao JP, Jin YH, Yu SF, Wu WF, Han SF. Evaluate the effectiveness of breast cancer decision aids: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomize clinical trails. Nursing Open 2021;8(5):2091-104. - PMC - PubMed
Gogovor 2022
    1. Gogovor A, Fakhfakh M, Asmaou BD, Acakpo O, Ayivi-Vinz G, Musabyimana A, et al. Shared decision-making and person-centred care approaches in three African regions. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2022;171:6-10. - PubMed
Grad 2017
    1. Grad R, Légaré F, Bell NR, Dickinson JA, Singh H, Moore AE, et al. Shared decision making in preventive health care: what it is; what it is not. Canadian Family Physician Medecin de Famille Canadien 2017;63(9):682-4. - PMC - PubMed
GRADEpro GDT [Computer program]
    1. GRADEpro GDT. Version accessed 1 February 2018. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime). Available at gradepro.org.
Gummersbach 2015
    1. Gummersbach E, in der Schmitten J, Mortsiefer A, Abholz HH, Wegscheider K, Pentzek M. Willingness to participate in mammography screening: a randomized controlled questionnaire study of responses to two patient information leaflets with different factual content. Deutsches Arzteblatt International 2015;112(5):61-8. - PMC - PubMed
Harding 2015
    1. Harding C, Pompei F, Burmistrov D, Welch HG, Abebe R, Wilson R. Breast cancer screening, incidence, and mortality across US counties. JAMA Internal Medicine 2015;175(9):1483-9. - PubMed
Hersch 2013
    1. Hersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Howard K, et al. Women’s views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study. BMJ 2013;346:f158. - PMC - PubMed
Hersch 2015
    1. Hersch J, Barratt A, Jansen J, Irwig L, McGeechan K, Jacklyn G, et al. Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;385(9978):1642-52. - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557-60. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557] [PMID: ] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2022a
    1. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.3.
Higgins 2022b
    1. Higgins JPT, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.3.
Higgins 2022c
    1. Higgins JPT, Eldridge S, Li T (editors). Chapter 23: Including variants on randomized trials. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.3.
Holmes‐Rovner 1996
    1. Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N, Rovner DR, Breer ML, Rothert ML, et al. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Medical Decision Making 1996;16(1):58-64. - PubMed
Jelicic 2016
    1. Jelicic Kadic A, Vucic K, Dosenovic S, Sapunar D, Puljak L. Extracting data from figures with software was faster, with higher interrater reliability than manual extraction. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016;74:119-23. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Jones 2021
    1. Jones J, Cowe M, Marks S, McAllister T, Mendoza A, Ponniah C, et al. Reporting on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research publications: using the GRIPP2 checklists with lay co-researchers. Research Involvement and Engagement 2021;7(1):52. [DOI: 10.1186/s40900-021-00295-w] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Kang 2019
    1. Kang TW, Jung JH, Hwang EC, Borofsky M, Kim MH, Dahm P. Convective radiofrequency water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2019, Issue 1. Art. No: CD013251. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013251] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Keating 2018
    1. Keating NL, Pace LE. Breast cancer screening in 2018: time for shared decision making. JAMA 2018;319(17):1814-5. - PubMed
Kew 2017
    1. Kew KM, Malik P, Aniruddhan K, Normansell R. Shared decision-making for people with asthma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017, Issue 10. Art. No: CD012330. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012330.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Klarenbach 2018
    1. Klarenbach S, Sims-Jones N, Lewin G, Singh H, Thériault G, Tonelli M, et al. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in women aged 40–74 years who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2018;190(49):E1441-51. - PMC - PubMed
Kriston 2010
    1. Kriston L, Scholl I, Hölzel L, Simon D, Loh A, Härter M. The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Education and Counseling 2010;80(1):94-9. - PubMed
Lee 2022
    1. Lee YK, Ng CJ, Lee PY, Tong WT, Sa'at H. Shared decision-making in Malaysia: legislation, patient involvement, implementation and the impact of COVID-19. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2022;171:89-92. - PMC - PubMed
Lillie 2014
    1. Lillie SE, Partin MR, Rice K, Fabbrini AE, Greer NL, Patel SS, et al. The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening - a systematic review. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK310875/ 2014. - PubMed
Légaré 2007
    1. Légaré F, Graham ID, O'Connor AC, Aubin M, Baillargeon L, Leduc Y, et al. Prediction of health professionals' intention to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice. Health Expectations 2007;10(4):364-79. - PMC - PubMed
Légaré 2014
    1. Légaré F, Thompson-Leduc P. Twelve myths about shared decision making. Patient Education and Counseling 2014;96(3):281-6. - PubMed
Maes‐Carballo 2021
    1. Maes-Carballo M, Moreno-Asencio T, Martín-Díaz M, Mignini L, Bueno-Cavanillas A, Khan KS. Shared decision making in breast cancer screening guidelines: a systematic review of their quality and reporting. European Journal of Public Health 2021;31(4):873-83. - PubMed
Makoul 2006
    1. Makoul G, Clayman ML. An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Education and Counseling 2006;60(3):301-12. - PubMed
Martínez‐Alonso 2017
    1. Martínez-Alonso M, Carles-Lavila M, Pérez-Lacasta MJ, Pons-Rodríguez A, Garcia M, Rué M. Assessment of the effects of decision aids about breast cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2017;7(10):e016894. - PMC - PubMed
Mathieu 2007
    1. Mathieu E, Barratt A, Davey HM, McGeechan K, Howard K, Houssami N. Informed choice in mammography screening: a randomized trial of a decision aid for 70-year-old women. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007;167(19):2039-46. - PubMed
McCormack 2018
    1. McCormack J, Elwyn G. Shared decision is the only outcome that matters when it comes to evaluating evidence-based practice. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2018;23(4):137. - PubMed
MECIR 2023
    1. Higgins JPT, Lasserson T, Thomas J, Flemyng E, Churchill R. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Cochrane: London, Version August 2023.
Michie 2002
    1. Michie S, Dormandy E, Marteau TM. The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study. Communication in Healthcare 2002;48(1):87-91. - PubMed
Michie 2003
    1. Michie S, Dormandy E, Marteau TM. Informed choice: understanding knowledge in the context of screening uptake. Patient, Education and Counseling 2003;50(3):247-53. - PubMed
Nagler 2017
    1. Nagler RH, Franklin Fowler E, Gollust SE. Women's awareness of and responses to messages about breast cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatment: results from a 2016 national survey. Medical Care 2017;55(10):879-85. - PMC - PubMed
Nelson 2019
    1. Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Haney E, Holmes R, Stillman L. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA1/2-related cancer in women: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis, No. 182. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK545867/ August 2019. - PubMed
O'Connor 1995
    1. O'Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Medical Decision Making 1995;15(1):25-30. - PubMed
Oeffinger 2015
    1. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, Herzig A, Michaelson JS, Shih YC, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA 2015;314(15):1599-614. - PMC - PubMed
OHRI
    1. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI). Patient Decision Aids. decisionaid.ohri.ca/ Accessed 7 December 2020.
Page 2021
    1. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Pillay 2018
    1. Pillay J, MacGregor T, Featherstone R, Hartling L, Alberta Evidence Review and Synthesis Centre for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care under contract by the Public Health Agency of Canada. Breast Cancer Screening: Part B. Systematic review on women’s values and preferences to inform an update of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care 2011 guideline (updated June 2018). CTFPHC, 2018. canadiantaskforce.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Womens-Values-and-Prefer... (accessed 3 September 2020).
Plot Digitalizer [Computer program]
    1. Plot Digitalizer. Version 2.6.8. La Jolla, CA: Source Forge, owned and operated by Slashdot Media, 2015. Available at sourceforge.net/projects/plotdigitizer/files/.
RevMan 2024 [Computer program]
    1. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 7.2.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2024. Available at revman.cochrane.org.
Riganti 2022
    1. Riganti P, Franco JVA, Ruiz YMV, Carrara C, Barani M, Kopitowski K. Shared decision-making in Argentina in 2022. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2022;171:11-4. - PubMed
Ruiz 2019
    1. Ruiz YMV, Barani MS, Franco JVA, Vazquez PFR, Terrasa SA, Kopitowski KS. Translation, transcultural adaptation, and validation of two questionnaires on shared decision making. Health Expect 2019;22(2):193-200. - PMC - PubMed
Santesso 2020
    1. Santesso N, Glenton C, Dahm P, Garner P, Akl EA, Alper B, et al. GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2020;119:126-35. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.014] [PMID: ] - DOI - PubMed
Saslow 2007
    1. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society Guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2007;57(2):75-89. - PubMed
Scholl 2011
    1. Scholl I, Loon M, Sepucha K, Elwyn G, Légaré F, Härter M, et al. Measurement of shared decision making – a review of instruments. Zeitchrift fur Evidenz, Forbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen 2011;105(4):313-24. [DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.012] - DOI - PubMed
Scholl 2012
    1. Scholl I, Kriston L, Dirmaier J, Buchholz A, Härter M. Development and psychometric properties of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire – physician version (SDM-Q-Doc). Patient Education and Counseling 2012;88(2):284-90. - PubMed
Schrager 2017
    1. Schrager SB, Phillips G, Burnside E. A simple approach to shared decision making in cancer screening. Family Practice Management 2017;24(3):5-10. - PMC - PubMed
Seely 2018
    1. Seely JM, Alhassan T. Screening for breast cancer in 2018 – what should we be doing today? Current Oncology 2018;25(Suppl 1):S115-24. - PMC - PubMed
Shepherd 2016
    1. Shepherd HL, Barratt A, Jones A, Bateson D, Carey K, Trevena LJ, et al. Can consumers learn to ask three questions to improve shared decision making? A feasibility study of the ASK (AskShareKnow) Patient-Clinician Communication Model(®) intervention in a primary health-care setting. Health Expectations 2016;19(5):1160-8. - PMC - PubMed
Siu 2016
    1. Siu AL, on behalf of the US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine 2016;164(4):279-96. - PubMed
Sleath 2011
    1. Sleath BL, Carpenter DM, Sayner R, Ayala GX, Williams D, Davis S, et al. Child and caregiver involvement and shared decision-making during asthma pediatric visits. Journal of Asthma 2011;48(10):1022-31. - PMC - PubMed
Stacey 2012
    1. Stacey D, Kryworuchko J, Bennett C, Murray MA, Mullan S, Légaré F. Decision coaching to prepare patients for making health decisions: a systematic review of decision coaching in trials of patient decision aids. Medical Decision Making 2012;32(3):E22-33. - PubMed
Stacey 2017
    1. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, Barry MJ, Bennett CL, Eden KB, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017, Issue 4. Art. No: CD001431. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Stager 1993
    1. Stager JL. The comprehensive Breast Cancer Knowledge Test: validity and reliability. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1993;18(7):1133-40. - PubMed
Sterne 2016
    1. Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savovic J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016;355:i4919. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Sterne 2019a
    1. Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019;366:l4898. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Sterne 2022b
    1. Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, McAleenan A, Reeves BC, Higgins JPT. Chapter 25: Assessing risk of bias in a non-randomized study. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available at training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.3.
Toupin‐April 2019
    1. Toupin-April K, Barton JL, Fraenkel L, Meara A, Li LC, Brooks P, et al. Development of a core domain set of outcomes for shared decision making interventions: an OMERACT White Paper and stakeholder interviews. The Journal of Rheumatology 2019;46(10):1409-14. [DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.181071] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Treadwell 2016
    1. Treadwell J, McCartney M. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment: generalists – it's time for a grassroots revolution. British Journal of General Practice 2016;66(644):116-7. - PMC - PubMed
Trenaman 2016
    1. Trenaman L, Selva A, Desroches S, Singh K, Bissonnette J, Bansback N, et al. A measurement framework for adherence in patient decision aid trials applied in a systematic review subanalysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016;77:15-23. - PubMed
UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening 2012
    1. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet 2012;380:1778-86. - PubMed
van Agt 2012
    1. Agt H, Fracheboud J, Steen A, Koning H. Do women make an informed choice about participating in breast cancer screening? A survey among women invited for a first mammography screening examination. Patient Education and Counseling 2012;89(2):353-9. - PubMed
van Seijen 2019
    1. Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM, Nik-Zainal S, Futreal A, Hwang ES, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question. British Journal of Cancer 2019;121(4):285-92. - PMC - PubMed
Warner 2011
    1. Warner E. Breast-cancer screening. New England Journal of Medicine 2011;365(11):1025-32. - PubMed
Wegwarth 2018
    1. Wegwarth O, Gigerenzer G. The barrier to informed choice in cancer screening: statistical illiteracy in physicians and patients. Recent Results in Cancer Research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer 2018;210:207-21. - PubMed
Weston 2001
    1. Weston WW. Informed and shared decision-making: the crux of patient-centred care. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2001;165(4):438. - PMC - PubMed
Wigfall 2018
    1. Wigfall LT, Tanner AH. Health literacy and health-care engagement as predictors of shared decision-making among adult information seeks in the USA: a secondary data analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey. Journal of Cancer Education 2018;33(1):67-73. - PMC - PubMed
Winters 2017
    1. Winters S, Martin C, Murphy D, Shokar NK. Breast cancer epidemiology, prevention, and screening. Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science 2017;151:1-32. - PubMed
Yu 2020
    1. Yu L, Li P, Yang S, Guo P, Zhang X, Liu N, et al. Web-based decision aids to support breast cancer screening decisions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research 2020;9(14):985-1002. [DOI: 10.2217/cer-2020-0052] [PMID: ] - DOI - PubMed
Yu 2021
    1. Yu L, Yang S, Zhang C, Guo P, Zhang X, Xu M, et al. Decision aids for breast cancer screening in women approximately 50 years of age: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2021 Nov 4 [Epub ahead of print]. [DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16112] - DOI - PubMed
Zeng 2022
    1. Zeng L, Brignardello-Petersen R, Hultcrantz M, Mustafa RA, Murad MH, Iorio A, et al. GRADE Guidance 34: update on rating imprecision using a minimally contextualized approach. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2022;150:216-24. [PMID: ] - PubMed

Associated data