Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHersch, Jolyn
dc.contributor.authorJansen, Jesse
dc.contributor.authorBarratt, Alexandra
dc.contributor.authorIrwig, Les
dc.contributor.authorHoussami, Nehmat
dc.contributor.authorJacklyn, Gemma
dc.contributor.authorThornton, Hazel
dc.contributor.authorDhillon, Haryana
dc.contributor.authorMcCaffery, Kirsten
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-19
dc.date.available2017-04-19
dc.date.issued2014-09-25
dc.identifier.citationHersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Jacklyn G, Thornton H, Dhillon H, McCaffery K. Overdetection in breast cancer screening: Development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid. BMJ Open. 2014 Sep 25; 4(9): e006016. PubMed PMID: 25256188.en
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055
dc.identifier.urihttp://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/4/9/e006016
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2123/16656
dc.descriptionDecision aid developmenten
dc.description.abstractObjective: To develop, pilot and refine a decision aid (ahead of a randomised trial evaluation) for women around age 50 facing their initial decision about whether to undergo mammography screening. Design: Two-stage mixed-method pilot study including qualitative interviews (n=15) and a randomised comparison using a quantitative survey (n=34). Setting: New South Wales, Australia. Participants: Women aged 43–59 years with no personal history of breast cancer. Interventions: The decision aid provides evidence-based information about important outcomes of mammography screening over 20 years (breast cancer mortality reduction, overdetection and false positives) compared with no screening. The information is presented in a short booklet for women, combining text and visual formats. A control version produced for the purposes of comparison omits the overdetection-related content. Outcomes: Comprehension of key decision aid content and acceptability of the materials. Results: Most women considered the decision aid clear and helpful and would recommend it to others. Nonetheless, the piloting process raised important issues that we tried to address in iterative revisions. Some participants found it hard to understand overdetection and why it is of concern, while there was often confusion about the distinction between overdetection and false positives. In a screening context, encountering balanced information rather than persuasion appears to be contrary to people’s expectations, but women appreciated the opportunity to become better informed. Conclusions: The concept of overdetection is complex and new to the public. This study highlights some key challenges for communicating about this issue. It is important to clarify that overdetection differs from false positives in terms of its more serious consequences (overtreatment and associated harms). Screening decision aids also must clearly explain their purpose of facilitating informed choice. A staged approach to development and piloting of decision aids is recommended to further improve understanding of overdetection and support informed decision-making about screening.en
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Health and Medical Research Councilen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen
dc.relationNHMRC 1062389en
dc.rightsOther
dc.subjectoverdetectionen
dc.subjectoverdiagnosisen
dc.subjectbreast canceren
dc.subjectbreast screeningen
dc.subjectdecision aiden
dc.subjectpilot studyen
dc.subjectmixed methodsen
dc.subjectinformed decision makingen
dc.subjecthealth communicationen
dc.subjectmammography screeningen
dc.titleOverdetection in breast cancer screening: Development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aiden
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006016
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen
usyd.facultyFaculty of Medicine and Health


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.