MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087036040 · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-14-199

Pre-consultation educational group intervention to improve shared decision-making in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

2013· article· en· W2087036040 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Jennica Platt, Nancy N. Baxter, Jennifer M. Jones, Kelly Metcalfe, Natalie Causarano, Stefan O.P. Hofer, Anne O’Neill, Terry Cheng, Elizabeth Starenkyj, Toni Zhong

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCancer Care OntarioGlaxoSmithKlineConquer Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineBreast reconstructionRandomized controlled trialPsychosocialIntervention (counseling)Breast cancerQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyProtocol (science)MastectomyFamily medicineNursingSurgeryAlternative medicineCancerPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Pre-Consultation Educational Group INTERVENTION pilot study seeks to assess the feasibility and inform the optimal design for a definitive randomized controlled trial that aims to improve the quality of decision-making in postmastectomy breast reconstruction patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a mixed-methods pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial that will follow a single-center, 1:1 allocation, two-arm parallel group superiority design. SETTING: The University Health Network, a tertiary care cancer center in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Adult women referred to one of three plastic and reconstructive surgeons for delayed breast reconstruction or prophylactic mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. INTERVENTION: We designed a multi-disciplinary educational group workshop that incorporates the key components of shared decision-making, decision-support, and psychosocial support for cancer survivors prior to the initial surgical consult. The intervention consists of didactic lectures by a plastic surgeon and nurse specialist on breast reconstruction choices, pre- and postoperative care; a value-clarification exercise led by a social worker; and discussions with a breast reconstruction patient. CONTROL: Usual care includes access to an informational booklet, website, and patient volunteer if desired. OUTCOMES: Expected pilot outcomes include feasibility, recruitment, and retention targets. Acceptability of intervention and full trial outcomes will be established through qualitative interviews. Trial outcomes will include decision-quality measures, patient-reported outcomes, and service outcomes, and the treatment effect estimate and variability will be used to inform the sample size calculation for a full trial. DISCUSSION: Our pilot study seeks to identify the (1) feasibility, acceptability, and design of a definitive RCT and (2) the optimal content and delivery of our proposed educational group intervention. Thirty patients have been recruited to date (8 April 2013), of whom 15 have been randomized to one of three decision support workshops. The trial will close as planned in May 2013. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01857882.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.213
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207