The goal of this program is to improve population health by assisting clinicians and their patients to address the challenges of individualizing breast cancer treatment for women with favorable prognosis. Project 1 is concerned with the management of locoregional therapy;Project 2 with the management of systemic therapy;and Project 3 aims to evaluate a Patient Intervention decision tool. Common elements across projects include being informed by an overall conceptual model, presenting similar constructs, and sharing a methodology requiring the use of patient surveys, and the merging of -Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Registry clinical data elements with information obtained from patient surveys. Finally, Projects 1 and 2 propose surveying attending clinicians of patient participants. Core B will support these cross-project activities by: overseeing the development and use of consistent survey measures, maximizing the efficiency of a uniform strategy for SEER-based sampling and rapid case ascertainment;coordinating patient and clinician survey data collection protocols;and, developing standardized methods for merging datasets. This Core will have an opportunity to advance innovative population-based methods regarding measurement reliability, validity, and durability.
The specific aims of Core B are as follows:
Aim 1 : Develop a bank of survey measures and items that will provide consistency in the measurement of common constructs across studies.
Aim 2 : Develop and implement a uniform strategy for SEER-based sampling, rapid case ascertainment, and the integration of clinical data collected through routine surveillance activities.
Aim 3 : Coordinate the development and implementation of patient and clinician surveys to maximize participant rates, minimize the number of unique patients required across studies, and minimize the administrative burden on SEER sites.
Aim 4 : Validate key clinical information collected by SEER under the new SEER 2010 data requirements against patient self-report (e.g., receipt of radiation) and other objective measures (e.g., 21 gene assay).
Aim 5 : Further inform our measurement of """"""""decision quality"""""""" including: (a) relationship with patient appraisal of other key concepts, (b) stability over time, and (c) variability across populations.
Results from this program will improve public health by addressing the challenges of individualizing care for women with breast cancer. This Core will focus on advancing innovative methods in population-based cancer research by sun/eying large numbers of patients and their clinicians across three distinct areas of the United States and assessing the validity of clinical measures important in cancer quality of care research
|Martinez, Kathryn A; Resnicow, Ken; Williams, Geoffrey C et al. (2016) Does physician communication style impact patient report of decision quality for breast cancer treatment? Patient Educ Couns 99:1947-1954|
|Wallner, Lauren P; Martinez, Kathryn A; Li, Yun et al. (2016) Use of Online Communication by Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer During the Treatment Decision Process. JAMA Oncol 2:1654-1656|
|Kerber, Kevin A; Meurer, William J; Brown, Devin L et al. (2015) Stroke risk stratification in acute dizziness presentations: A prospective imaging-based study. Neurology 85:1869-78|
|Martinez, Kathryn A; Kurian, Allison W; Hawley, Sarah T et al. (2015) How can we best respect patient autonomy in breast cancer treatment decisions? Breast Cancer Manag 4:53-64|
|Katz, Steven J; Kurian, Allison W; Morrow, Monica (2015) Treatment Decision Making and Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer: Mainstreaming Mutations. JAMA 314:997-8|
|Shumway, Dean; Griffith, Kent A; Jagsi, Reshma et al. (2015) Psychometric properties of a brief measure of autonomy support in breast cancer patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 15:51|
|Katz, Steven J (2014) Treatment decision aids are unlikely to cut healthcare costs. BMJ 348:g1172|
|Resnicow, Ken; Abrahamse, Paul; Tocco, Rachel S et al. (2014) Development and psychometric properties of a brief measure of subjective decision quality for breast cancer treatment. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 14:110|
|Katz, Steven J; Belkora, Jeffrey; Elwyn, Glyn (2014) Shared decision making for treatment of cancer: challenges and opportunities. J Oncol Pract 10:206-8|
|Katz, Steven J; Hawley, Sarah (2014) Patient-physician shared decision making--reply. JAMA 311:864|
Showing the most recent 10 out of 12 publications