Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial
Published on: August 19, 2025
Improving Breast Cancer Surgical Treatment Decision Making: The iCanDecide Randomized Clinical Trial
Sarah T Hawley1, Yun Li1, Lawrence C An1
1Sarah T. Hawley, Lawrence C. An, Michael S. Sabel, Reshma Jagsi, Timothy P. Hofer, and Steven J. Katz, University of Michigan Medical School; Sarah T. Hawley, Yun Li, Kenneth Resnicow, Nancy K. Janz, and Steven J. Katz, University of Michigan School of Public Health; Sarah T. Hawley, VA Health Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Angela Fagerlin, University of Utah, School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Abstract:
Purpose This study was conducted to determine the effect of iCanDecide, an interactive and tailored breast cancer treatment decision tool, on the rate of high-quality patient decisions-both informed and values concordant-regarding locoregional breast cancer treatment and on patient appraisal of decision making. Methods We conducted a randomized clinical trial of newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer making locoregional treatment decisions. From 22 surgical practices, 537 patients were recruited and randomly assigned online to the iCanDecide interactive and tailored Web site (intervention) or the iCanDecide static Web site (control). Participants completed a baseline survey and were mailed a follow-up survey 4 to 5 weeks after enrollment to assess the primary outcome of a high-quality decision, which consisted of two components, high knowledge and values-concordant treatment, and secondary outcomes (decision preparation, deliberation, and subjective decision quality). Results Patients in the intervention arm had higher odds of making a high-quality decision than did those in the control arm (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.92; P = .0004), which was driven primarily by differences in the rates of high knowledge between groups. The majority of patients in both arms made values-concordant treatment decisions (78.6% in the intervention arm and 81.4% in the control arm). More patients in the intervention arm had high decision preparation (estimate, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34; P = .027), but there were no significant differences in the other decision appraisal outcomes. The effect of the intervention was similar for women who were leaning strongly toward a treatment option at enrollment compared with those who were not. Conclusion The tailored and interactive iCanDecide Web site, which focused on knowledge building and values clarification, positively affected high-quality decisions largely by improving knowledge compared with static online information. To be effective, future patient-facing decision tools should be integrated into the clinical workflow to improve decision making.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

