Evaluating a shared decision engagement system in the NCI community oncology research program: a multi-level RCT

Clicks: 2
ID: 330072
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #61 of 62 articles by views in jnci cancer spectrum

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Improving patient-centered care and communication in breast cancer remains challenging in the complex and evolving landscape of breast cancer care delivery. Methods The SharES (Alliance A231901CD) trial was carried out in collaboration with the NCI Community Oncology Research Program Alliance Research Base to evaluate a multi-level intervention in a crossed design: 1) a patient-level randomized intervention of the evidence-based iCanDecide online tool with added emotional support enhancements (iCanDecide-ESE), intended to promote better information uptake by supporting management of distress associated with a new diagnosis vs. the standard version (iCanDecide-S); and 2) a clinic-level stepped-wedge randomized Clinician Dashboard intervention. Patient-reported outcomes assessed 5-weeks after registration were knowledge about breast cancer locoregional treatment (primary outcome), cancer worry and breast cancer self-efficacy (key secondary outcomes). We evaluated outcomes using linear mixed models considering the nesting of individuals within clinic across time periods. Results We enrolled 542 (403 evaluable) patients and 54 clinicians across 25 surgical clinics. The confidence intervals for all outcomes included zero but excluded pre-specified clinically important differences in the knowledge score. We found good fidelity to the intervention components and considerable variation in the primary outcome across sites. Conclusions The addition of emotional support components to a patient support tool previously found effective is unlikely to result in clinically important improvements in knowledge, cancer worry, or breast cancer self-efficacy. The strong engagement of NCORP sites, clinicians and patients with the study and intervention components suggests future cancer care delivery studies could leverage implementation strategies to promote multi-level patient-centered communication interventions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04549571. Registered on 16 September 2020.
Reference Key
openalex_W7214670032 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Sarah T. Hawley, Kelley M. Kidwell, Reshma Jagsi, Anne Barber, Rachel Wills, Selina Lai-ming Chow, Oudom Kour, Diana Segovia, Paul Abrahamse, Ken Resnicow, Brian J. Zikmund‐Fisher, Timothy P. Hofer, Heather B Neuman
Journal jnci cancer spectrum
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jncics/pkag100
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkag100
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.