The relationship between health literacy and perceived shared decision making in patients with breast cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 360-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiu-Nien Shen ◽  
Chia-Chen Lin ◽  
Tammy Hoffmann ◽  
Chia-Yin Tsai ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Hou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
The Relationship

scholarly journals Relationship between dementia severity in older women and family caregivers’ preferences for shared decision making about breast cancer screening

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Frank ◽  
Nicole Fowler
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Family Caregiver ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Dementia Severity ◽  
The Relationship

Background/Objective: Mammography is one of the most effective ways to diagnose breast cancer early; however, its perceived benefits are complicated by terminal conditions such as dementia. By undergoing mammography, women with dementia risk treatment complications and false-positive results, which can exacerbate psychological distress. The lack of a standard of care confounds the individual roles of the patient, family caregiver, and physician in the decision-making process. This study evaluates the relationship between dementia severity and family caregiver preferences for shared decision making. Methods: Data were gathered from the Decisions about Cancer screening in Alzheimer’s Disease trial, which uses the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS) and a revised version of the Control Preferences Scale (CPS) to assess family caregiver preferences for decision-making as a dyad (patient and caregiver) and triad (patient, caregiver, and physician). Two multinomial logistic regression models assessed the relationship between DSRS and CPS categories (active, passive, and collaborative), while controlling for the caregivers’ age, gender, education, relationship to patient, self-perceived income, and race. Both models used the “active” group as the baseline; however, Model 1 examined preferences as a dyad and Model 2 as a triad. Results: Model 1 found a statistically significant association between dementia severity and a collaborative approach (p<0.001), and between dementia severity and a passive approach (p=0.014). For every one-unit increase in DSRS score, the odds of being in the collaborative group decreased by 0.083 and the odds of being in the passive group decreased by 0.085. There was no statistically significant association between dementia severity and decision-making preferences in Model 2. Clinical Significance: The association between dementia severity and family caregiver decision-making preferences supports the need for a standard of care regarding breast cancer screening in women with dementia.

Exploring and supporting older women’s chemotherapy decision-making in early-stage breast cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 181-181
Author(s):  
Meghan Sri Karuturi ◽  
Ashley Housten ◽  
Sharon H. Giordano ◽  
Diana Hoover ◽  
Robert Joseph Volk
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Single Item ◽  
Neo Adjuvant Chemotherapy

181 Background: Few studies have focused on the therapeutic decision-making process in older adults with cancer. This study sought to address this gap by exploring older adult breast cancer patients’ (pts) perspectives on neo/adjuvant chemotherapy, thereby identifying informational needs as they navigate the decision-making process. Methods: Women ≥65 years diagnosed with early stage (I-III) breast cancer were recruited from an academic center following their decision on whether to receive neo/adjuvant chemotherapy. Pts took part in individual semi-structured interviews to explore their perspectives, knowledge, and values. They also completed surveys assessing sociodemographics, health literacy/numeracy, and shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and analyzed using the Sort and Sift, Think and Shift qualitative approach. Quantitative data was summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: 26 pts completed interviews (age range 65-92; 81% non-Hispanic White; 81% ≥ college degree; 70% single). 14 pts elected to undergo chemotherapy and 11 declined. Most pts had adequate health literacy (mean = 4.31; SD = 1.1 on Single Item Literacy Scale) and numeracy (mean = 4.4; SD = 1.0 on Single Item Numeracy Scale). Pts scored high on the shared decision-making questionnaires (SDM-Q-9, mean = 5.3, SD = 0.7). Thematic analysis uncovered several commonalities regardless of the decision. Pts sought information regarding their disease/treatment, but in some instances were confused regarding the objective of chemotherapy. They often chose treatment outside of the physician’s recommendation, and referenced the subjective experience of friends/family members with cancer. Self-perception of health and the side-effects of chemotherapy were also key factors. Pts also placed importance on the maintenance of quality of life throughout the treatment trajectory. Conclusions: Decision-making strategies in older patients were shaped by knowledge, values and the anectodal experience of others. These discussions will subsequently shape the creation of a decision support tool for older pts and physicians to better facilitate the shared-decision making process.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 2128
Author(s):  
Marta Maes-Carballo ◽  
Manuel Martín-Díaz ◽  
Luciano Mignini ◽  
Khalid Saeed Khan ◽  
Rubén Trigueros ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Professional Societies ◽  
New Policies

Objectives: To assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale. Results: The participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36–4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51–4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37–3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88–4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients’ paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%). Conclusions: New policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.

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

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Riganti ◽  
M. Victoria Ruiz Yanzi ◽  
Camila Micaela Escobar Liquitay ◽  
Karin S Kopitowski ◽  
Juan VA Franco
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals Computer knows best? The need for value-flexibility in medical AI

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind J McDougall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Patient Autonomy ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Value Judgements ◽  
The Relationship

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being developed for use in medicine, including for diagnosis and in treatment decision making. The use of AI in medical treatment raises many ethical issues that are yet to be explored in depth by bioethicists. In this paper, I focus specifically on the relationship between the ethical ideal of shared decision making and AI systems that generate treatment recommendations, using the example of IBM’s Watson for Oncology. I argue that use of this type of system creates both important risks and significant opportunities for promoting shared decision making. If value judgements are fixed and covert in AI systems, then we risk a shift back to more paternalistic medical care. However, if designed and used in an ethically informed way, AI could offer a potentially powerful way of supporting shared decision making. It could be used to incorporate explicit value reflection, promoting patient autonomy. In the context of medical treatment, we need value-flexible AI that can both respond to the values and treatment goals of individual patients and support clinicians to engage in shared decision making.

Shared decision-making for breast cancer patients

2013 ◽  
pp. 311-321
Author(s):  
Catharine Clay ◽  
Alice Andrews ◽  
Dale Vidal
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients

scholarly journals PD40-07 ADDRESSING HEALTH LITERACY IMPROVES SHARED DECISION MAKING IN UNDERSERVED AFRICAN AMERICAN PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e817-e818
Author(s):  
Kerry Kilbridge ◽  
William Martin-Doyle* ◽  
Christopher Filson ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
Sierra Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
African American ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document