Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 16, 2026

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Cancer Drug Sensitization In Vitro and In Vivo
Published on: February 6, 2015
Comparative Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Cancer-Screening Decision Making: An Overview of Reviews
Masaya Hibino1, Chisato Hamashima2, Miyuki Hirosue1
1Department of Emergency Medicine and General Internal Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Background:
Decision aids (DAs), compared to no DAs, help improve the key aspects of shared decision-making, including increased knowledge, discussion frequency, and reduction in decisional conflict. However, systematic reviews have reported varied conclusions on screening uptake, and which DAs are superior to alternative forms in shared decision-making for cancer screening has not been comprehensively reviewed.
Methods:
An overview of systematic reviews was performed. Multiple databases were searched up to December 31, 2023, for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies (NRCSs) of any size that assessed a decision aid aimed to facilitate cancer-screening decision making communications. Dual screening of abstracts and full-text reports, dual data extraction and quality assessment, and qualitative synthesis were performed.
Results:
The 22 eligible publications included 24 reviews on cancer screening DAs for a single specific cancer (8, 8, 7, and 1 on prostate, breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, respectively) and three reviews on multiple aggregate cancers. Individual reviews were based on different primary study designs (92 RCTs and 37 NRCSs); each study was infrequently cited (median citation count 2; range 1-9). Although the DAs had variable formats and delivery methods, the reviews generally focused on use and non-use comparisons. DAs decreased the intention or actual uptake for prostate and breast cancer screening, but increased it for colorectal cancer screening. DAs were associated with increased knowledge, well-informed choice, and reduced decisional conflict, regardless of cancer type. Only four reviews on comparative effectiveness between alternative formats of DAs (based on 14 RCTs and 2 NRCSs) failed to conclude on the specific format that was superior to others.
Discussion:
DAs improve cancer screening shared decision-making by boosting cancer screening knowledge and informed choice and lowering decisional conflict and may facilitate preference-based, individualized screening participation. Comparative data on different cancer screening DAs are limited.
Systematic Review Registration:
PROSPERO, CRD42021235957.
More Related Videos
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
06:46Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Prevention
Some...
Cancer Prevention
Some...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Cancer Survival Analysis
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...