Decision Support Tools for Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening : A Scoping Review of Information Content, Format, and Presentation Methods
Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
Several countries mandate informed or shared decision-making for low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening, but knowledge is limited about the type of information and presentation techniques used to support decision-making in practice. This review aimed to characterize the content, format, mode, and presentation methods of decision support tools (DSTs) for LDCT lung cancer screening. DSTs reported within peer-reviewed articles (January 2000-April 2021) were identified systematically from PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus. Inclusion criteria revolved around the development or evaluation of a resource or tool intended to support individual or shared decision-making for LDCT lung cancer screening. The data-charting and extraction framework was based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards instrument and Template for Intervention Description and Reporting. Extracted data were organized within two categories: (1) study characteristics and context, format, and mode of DST use and (2) DST content and presentation methods. This review identified 22 DSTs in paper, video, or electronic formats across 26 articles. Most DSTs (n = 13) focused on knowledge exchange, whereas seven used interactive techniques to support values clarification (eg, Likert scales) and nine DSTs guided deliberation (eg, suggested discussion topics). The DSTs addressed similar topics, but the detail, quantification of probability, and presentation methods varied considerably. None described all the potential screening harms and results. The heterogeneity in DST design may affect the quality of decision-making, particularly for participants with lower literacy and numeracy. Evidence-based consensus guidelines for DST content and presentation methods should be developed collaboratively with screening-eligible adults.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:162 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Chest - 162(2022), 4 vom: 17. Okt., Seite 930-941 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Jallow, Mbasan [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Decision support tools |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 11.10.2022 Date Revised 10.02.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.chest.2021.12.638 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM334590027 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM334590027 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240210232413.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.chest.2021.12.638 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1286.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM334590027 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)34922933 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0012-3692(21)05089-3 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Jallow, Mbasan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Decision Support Tools for Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening |b A Scoping Review of Information Content, Format, and Presentation Methods |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 11.10.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 10.02.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a Several countries mandate informed or shared decision-making for low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening, but knowledge is limited about the type of information and presentation techniques used to support decision-making in practice. This review aimed to characterize the content, format, mode, and presentation methods of decision support tools (DSTs) for LDCT lung cancer screening. DSTs reported within peer-reviewed articles (January 2000-April 2021) were identified systematically from PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus. Inclusion criteria revolved around the development or evaluation of a resource or tool intended to support individual or shared decision-making for LDCT lung cancer screening. The data-charting and extraction framework was based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards instrument and Template for Intervention Description and Reporting. Extracted data were organized within two categories: (1) study characteristics and context, format, and mode of DST use and (2) DST content and presentation methods. This review identified 22 DSTs in paper, video, or electronic formats across 26 articles. Most DSTs (n = 13) focused on knowledge exchange, whereas seven used interactive techniques to support values clarification (eg, Likert scales) and nine DSTs guided deliberation (eg, suggested discussion topics). The DSTs addressed similar topics, but the detail, quantification of probability, and presentation methods varied considerably. None described all the potential screening harms and results. The heterogeneity in DST design may affect the quality of decision-making, particularly for participants with lower literacy and numeracy. Evidence-based consensus guidelines for DST content and presentation methods should be developed collaboratively with screening-eligible adults | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a decision support tools | |
| 650 | 4 | |a health inequality | |
| 650 | 4 | |a informed decision-making | |
| 650 | 4 | |a lung cancer screening | |
| 650 | 4 | |a shared decision-making | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bonfield, Stefanie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kurtidu, Clara |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Baldwin, David R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Black, Georgia |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brain, Kate E |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Donnelly, Michael |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Janes, Samuel M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a McCutchan, Grace |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Robb, Kathryn A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ruparel, Mamta |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Van Os, Sandra |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Quaife, Samantha L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Chest |d 1970 |g 162(2022), 4 vom: 17. Okt., Seite 930-941 |w (DE-627)NLM000002720 |x 1931-3543 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:162 |g year:2022 |g number:4 |g day:17 |g month:10 |g pages:930-941 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2021.12.638 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 162 |j 2022 |e 4 |b 17 |c 10 |h 930-941 | ||