Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorMaes Carballo, Marta 
dc.contributor.authorBueno Cavanillas, Aurora 
dc.contributor.authorSaeed Khan, Khalid 
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-10T11:14:17Z
dc.date.available2020-11-10T11:14:17Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationMaes-Carballo M, Muñoz-Núñez I, Martín-Díaz M, Mignini L, Bueno-Cavanillas A, Khan KS. Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review. Health Expect. 2020;00:1–20. [DOI: 10.1111/hex.13112 ]es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10481/64166
dc.description.abstractBackground: It is not clear whether clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are adequately promoting shared decision making (SDM). Objective: To evaluate the recommendations about SDM in CPGs and CSs concerning breast cancer (BC) treatment. Search strategy: Following protocol registration (Prospero no.: CRD42018106643), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2010 to December 2019. Inclusion criteria: CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were selected whether published in a journal or in an online document. Data extraction and synthesis: A 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was developed and used to extract data in duplicate. Main results: There were 167 relevant CPGs (139) and CSs (28); SDM was reported in only 40% of the studies. SDM was reported more often in recent publications after 2015 (42/101 (41.6 %) vs 46/66 (69.7 %), P = .0003) but less often in medical journal publications (44/101 (43.5 %) vs 17/66 (25.7 %), P = .009). In CPGs and CSs with SDM, only 8/66 (12%) met one-fifth (6 of 31) of the quality items; only 14/66 (8%) provided clear and precise SDM recommendations. Discussion and conclusions: SDM descriptions and recommendations in CPGs and CSs concerning BC treatment need improvement. SDM was more frequently reported in CPGs and CSs in recent years, but surprisingly it was less often covered in medical journals, a feature that needs attention.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWILEYes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectBreast canceres_ES
dc.subjectBreast cancer treatmentes_ES
dc.subjectClinical practice guidelineses_ES
dc.subjectConsensuses_ES
dc.subjectShared decision makinges_ES
dc.titleShared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic reviewes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/hex.13112


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución 3.0 España
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Atribución 3.0 España