MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7074745435

Decision Aids for Preventive Treatment Alternatives for BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: a Systematic Review

2021· article· en· W7074745435 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueKölner Universitäts PublikationsServer (Universität zu Köln) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision aidsContext (archaeology)Breast cancerDecision support systemDecision analysisGenetic testingGermanRisk assessmentMutationMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Women with a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation have a markedly increased lifetime risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. The current preventive treatment alternatives that are offered are an intensified breast cancer screening programme and risk-reducing operations. Before deciding on one option, medical and personal factors such as life situation and individual preferences must be weighed carefully. Decision aids are used internationally to support BRCA1/2 mutation carriers during their decision-making process. In this study these are analysed structurally for the first time and their applicability to the German context is examined. Material and Methods A systematic literature search in five electronic databases and a manual search were performed. The identified decision aids were evaluated with regard to formal criteria, medical content and quality. The qualitative assessment used the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration (IPDASi v4.0), which examined various dimensions (e.g., information, probabilities, values). Results Twenty decision aids, which were published between 2003 and 2019 in Australia (n=4), the United Kingdom (n=3), Canada (n=2), the Netherlands (n=2) and the USA (n=9), were included. Nine focus on BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and eleven include other risk groups. Eighteen include risk-reducing operations as decision options, 14 list screening methods for breast and/or ovarian cancer, and 13 describe the possibility of pharmacological prevention by means of selective oestrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors. Nine of the 20 decision aids meet fundamental quality criteria (IPDASi v4.0 qualification criteria). Conclusion International decision aids can serve formally as a basis for a German decision aid for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Some of them differ markedly in content from the recommendations of German guidelines. Only a few achieve a high quality. Zusammenfassung Einleitung Frauen mit einer pathogenen BRCA1/2 -Mutation haben ein deutlich erhohtes Lebenszeitrisiko, an Brust- und/oder Eierstockkrebs zu erkranken. Als derzeitige praventive Handlungsalternativen werden ein intensiviertes Brustkrebs-Fruherkennungsprogramm und risikoreduzierende Operationen angeboten. Vor der Entscheidung fur eine Option mussen medizinische und personliche Faktoren wie die Lebenssituation und individuelle Praferenzen sorgfaltig abgewogen werden. Um BRCA1/2 -Mutationstragerinnen wahrend ihres Entscheidungsfindungsprozesses zu unterstutzen, werden international Entscheidungshilfen eingesetzt. In dieser Studie werden diese erstmals strukturiert analysiert und auf ihre ubertragbarkeit auf den deutschen Kontext gepruft. Material und Methoden Es wurden eine systematische Literaturrecherche in 5 elektronischen Datenbanken sowie eine Handsuche durchgefuhrt. Die identifizierten Entscheidungshilfen wurden bezuglich formaler Kriterien, medizinischer Inhalte und ihrer Qualitat bewertet. Die qualitative Bewertung erfolgte mithilfe der Kriterien der International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration (IPDASi v4.0), mit denen verschiedene Dimensionen uberpruft wurden (z.B. Informationen, Wahrscheinlichkeiten, Wertevorstellungen). Ergebnisse Es wurden 20 Entscheidungshilfen eingeschlossen, die zwischen 2003 und 2019 in Australien (n=4), Gro ss britannien (n=3), Kanada (n=2), den Niederlanden (n=2) und den USA (n=9) veroffentlicht wurden. Neun richten sich an BRCA1/2 -Mutationstragerinnen, 11 schlie ss en weitere Risikogruppen ein. 18 beinhalten als Entscheidungsoptionen risikoreduzierende Operationen, 14 benennen Fruherkennungsverfahren fur Brust- und/oder Eierstockkrebs, 13 beschreiben die Moglichkeit der medikamentosen Pravention mittels selektiver ostrogenrezeptor-Modulatoren oder Aromatase-Inhibitoren. Neun der 20 Entscheidungshilfen erfullen grundlegende Qualitatskriterien (IPDASi v4.0-Qualifizierungskriterien). Schlussfolgerung Formal konnen internationale Entscheidungshilfen als Grundlage fur eine deutsche Entscheidungshilfe fur BRCA1/2 -Mutationstragerinnen dienen. Inhaltlich weichen sie teils deutlich von den Empfehlungen deutscher Leitlinien ab. Nur wenige erreichen eine hohe Qualitat.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.200 · 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