Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42519897›Full record

ArticleCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center

"Insight into who you are as a human being": Perceptions of the Utility and Usability of a Values Assessment Tool (VAsT) for Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Robert Crowder, Victoria Crowder, Soroush Fariman, Natasha Joglekar, Danielle Anderson, Juanita Miller, Stephanie Walker, Emily M Ray, Shaunta Ford-Pierce, Bryce B Reeve and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Robert CrowderOffice of Human Research and Ethics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Victoria CrowderSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Soroush FarimanDivision of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Natasha JoglekarLewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Danielle AndersonSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Juanita MillerSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Stephanie WalkerSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Emily M RayUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Shaunta Ford-PierceSchool of Medicine, Division of Oncology, North Carolina Basnight Cancer Hospital, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Bryce B ReeveSchool of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Antonia BennettSchool of Medicine, Division of Oncology, North Carolina Basnight Cancer Hospital, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Melissa MazorDivision of General Internal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Allison M DealSchool of Medicine, Division of Oncology, North Carolina Basnight Cancer Hospital, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Lorinda A CoombsSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

INTERVENTIONS FOR PREVENTING &MANAGING CHRONIC ILLNESST32NR007091 · NINR · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Cheryl L Giscombe, Cathi Barbra Propper · 1996 to 2026
$11.8M
NINR NIH HHS T32 NR007091
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

IntroductionWomen with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) often face complex treatment decisions that require careful consideration of values and priorities, which may be unique to each individual and evolve over the course of treatment. The patient-reported Values Assessment Tool (VAsT) was developed to help prioritize and communicate values to clinicians and care partners, thereby improving treatment decision-making. This study aimed to further refine the VAsT, assess perspectives on utility and usability of the VAsT, and evaluate the potential impact on communication between women with mBC, care partners, and clinicians who utilize the VAsT.MethodsA qualitative study using cognitive interview methodology was conducted. Qualitative cognitive interviews were conducted with seven women with mBC, three care partners, and four breast oncology clinicians. Participant feedback informed the refinement of the tool, and thematic analysis guided by Normalization Process Theory was conducted to understand the utility and usability of the VAsT among women with their clinicians and care partners.ResultsThe VAsT domains were confirmed (e.g.,

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAdultAgedCommunicationDecision MakingFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisQualitative Researchcaregiverscommunicationcommunity advisory boardhumanistic communicationmetastatic breast cancerolder adultspatient-centered communicationpatient preferencesqualitativeshared decision makingvalues assessmentvalues clarification

Identifiers

PMID42519897
PMCPMC13420118

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.