The Resource The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening : a systematic review, prepared for Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington, DC ; prepared by Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) Center, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN ; investigators: principal investigator, Sarah E. Lillie ; co-investigators, Melissa R. Partin [and 5 others] ; research associates: Roderick MacDonald, Indulis Rutks

The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening : a systematic review, prepared for Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington, DC ; prepared by Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) Center, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN ; investigators: principal investigator, Sarah E. Lillie ; co-investigators, Melissa R. Partin [and 5 others] ; research associates: Roderick MacDonald, Indulis Rutks

Label
The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening : a systematic review
Title
The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening
Title remainder
a systematic review
Statement of responsibility
prepared for Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington, DC ; prepared by Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) Center, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN ; investigators: principal investigator, Sarah E. Lillie ; co-investigators, Melissa R. Partin [and 5 others] ; research associates: Roderick MacDonald, Indulis Rutks
Creator
Contributor
Author
Issuing body
Subject
Genre
Language
eng
Summary
Decisions about cancer screening have become increasingly complex. Patients must decide whether to get screened, which screening modality to use, and how often to undergo and when to stop screening. Some cancer screening decisions are considered "preference-sensitive," meaning that, due to closely-balanced benefits and harms, the "right" decision is in part dependent on an individual's values and preferences for particular outcomes. Most organizations publishing clinical practice guidelines for cancer screening now recommend that preference-sensitive cancer screening decisions be made individually, using a process that considers the available evidence on the benefits and harms of particular options, and incorporates patient values and preferences relevant to those options. This approach is sometimes referred to as shared decision making (SDM). The goal of SDM interventions is to facilitate this approach. Adjuncts for the usual counseling for specific decisions, SDM interventions may include: (1) tools to help patients comprehend information about the risks and benefits of options, clarify their personal values related to these options, and participate in decisions consistent with these values and preferences (sometimes referred to as "decision aids") and (2) other interventions to prepare health care providers and/or systems to support this process. SDM interventions differ from many health-related interventions in that they primarily seek to elicit and support patient values and preferences in making health care-related decisions rather than to promote a particular health care strategy per se. In this review we examine the effects of SDM interventions for cancer screening in adults on constructs from the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, a commonly-used theoretical model of decision making. We examined the constructs of Decision Quality, Decision Impact, and, for studies reporting those outcomes, Decision Action. Decision Quality includes knowledge, values clarity (patients' clarity of their personal values regarding the risks and benefits of decision options), and the patients' participatory role in decision making. Decision Impact includes decisional conflict (personal uncertainty about which course of action to take), use of services (eg, consultation length), and satisfaction with the decision. Decision Action includes screening intention and behavior. The ideal SDM intervention would enhance Decision Quality (ie, increase knowledge and values clarity) and Impact (ie, increase satisfaction, reduce decision conflict, and have minimal impact on service utilization). The desired impact on Decision Action depends on the screening decision. For decisions about how to screen (such as colorectal cancer screening), the ideal SDM intervention would exert the desired effects on Decision Quality and Impact without reducing measures of Decision Action such as screening intention and behavior. For decisions about whether to screen (such as breast, cervical, and prostate cancer in some age groups and risk categories), the goal is to facilitate personalized decision making based on values and preferences. Hence, there are no desired effects on Decision Action per se in this context. We examine patient, provider, system, and multi-level SDM interventions, and therefore do not restrict this review to the most commonly employed SDM intervention of patient-directed decision aids. This topic was nominated by Linda Kinsinger, MD, MPH, VA Chief Consultant for Preventive Medicine at the VA National Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention (NCP). The evidence review is intended to examine the effects of SDM interventions for cancer screening practices and to inform what types of interventions NCP will disseminate with their cancer screening guidelines
Member of
Cataloging source
DNLM
http://library.link/vocab/creatorName
Lillie, Sarah E
Government publication
federal national government publication
Illustrations
illustrations
Index
no index present
Literary form
non fiction
Nature of contents
  • dictionaries
  • surveys of literature
NLM call number
QZ 241
http://library.link/vocab/relatedWorkOrContributorName
  • United States
  • Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (U.S.)
  • Minneapolis VA Health Care System (U.S.)
Series statement
Evidence-based synthesis program
http://library.link/vocab/subjectName
  • Neoplasms
  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Decision Making
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
Label
The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening : a systematic review, prepared for Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington, DC ; prepared by Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) Center, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN ; investigators: principal investigator, Sarah E. Lillie ; co-investigators, Melissa R. Partin [and 5 others] ; research associates: Roderick MacDonald, Indulis Rutks
Instantiates
Publication
Note
"September 2014."
Bibliography note
Includes bibliographical references
Carrier category
online resource
Carrier category code
cr
Carrier MARC source
rdacarrier
Color
multicolored
Content category
  • text
  • still image
Content type code
  • txt
  • sti
Content type MARC source
  • rdacontent
  • rdacontent
Control code
930496346
Dimensions
unknown
Extent
1 online resource (iv, 114 pages)
Form of item
online
Media category
computer
Media MARC source
rdamedia
Media type code
c
Other physical details
illustrations.
Specific material designation
remote
System control number
(OCoLC)930496346
Label
The effects of shared decision making on cancer screening : a systematic review, prepared for Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington, DC ; prepared by Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) Center, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN ; investigators: principal investigator, Sarah E. Lillie ; co-investigators, Melissa R. Partin [and 5 others] ; research associates: Roderick MacDonald, Indulis Rutks
Publication
Note
"September 2014."
Bibliography note
Includes bibliographical references
Carrier category
online resource
Carrier category code
cr
Carrier MARC source
rdacarrier
Color
multicolored
Content category
  • text
  • still image
Content type code
  • txt
  • sti
Content type MARC source
  • rdacontent
  • rdacontent
Control code
930496346
Dimensions
unknown
Extent
1 online resource (iv, 114 pages)
Form of item
online
Media category
computer
Media MARC source
rdamedia
Media type code
c
Other physical details
illustrations.
Specific material designation
remote
System control number
(OCoLC)930496346

Library Locations

  • Ellis LibraryBorrow it
    1020 Lowry Street, Columbia, MO, 65201, US
    38.944491 -92.326012
  • Engineering Library & Technology CommonsBorrow it
    W2001 Lafferre Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.946102 -92.330125
  • Fisher Delta Research CenterBorrow it
    2-64 Agricultural Bldg, Columbia, MO, 65201, US
    38.958397 -92.303491
  • Geological Sciences LibraryBorrow it
    201 Geological Sciences, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.947375 -92.329062
  • J. Otto Lottes Health Sciences LibraryBorrow it
    1 Hospital Dr, Columbia, MO, 65201, US
    38.939544 -92.328377
  • Journalism LibraryBorrow it
    102 Reynolds Jrnlism Institute, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.947290 -92.328025
  • Mathematical Sciences LibraryBorrow it
    104 Ellis Library, Columbia, MO, 65201, US
    38.944377 -92.326537
  • University ArchivesBorrow it
    Columbia, MO, 65201, US
  • University Archives McAlester AnnexBorrow it
    703 Lewis Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.934630 -92.342290
  • University of Missouri Libraries DepositoryBorrow it
    2908 Lemone Blvd, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.919360 -92.291620
  • Zalk Veterinary Medical LibraryBorrow it
    Veterinary Medicine West, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
    38.941099 -92.317911
Processing Feedback ...