Prioritization of Research Addressing Management Strategies for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

Gierisch et al. (2014) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

ductal carcinoma in situ

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

North America - USA

Why was it conducted at all?

The most important potential benefit of treatment of DCIS is the reduction in the number of deaths due to invasive breast cancer. For many women with a DCIS diagnosis, this may be an unrealized benefit. Some proportion of DCIS may never progress to life-threatening invasive cancer, so these women only have the adverse outcomes of diagnosis and treatments. Both active management strategies and surveillance approaches present tradeoffs relevant to patient-centered outcomes, such as symptoms, function, and well-being. Given the clinical importance of DCIS, the diversity of available treatment strategies, variety of patient-centered outcomes of interest, and areas of uncertainty, we sought to create a prioritized research agenda for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Re search Institute (PCORI) that would incorporate different stakeholders' perspectives.

What was the objective?

to develop a prioritized research agenda for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute as informed by a diverse group of stakeholders on the management of ductal carcinoma in situ

What was the outcome?

a ranking list of 10 research topics

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

horizon scan; survey

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: identification of evidence gaps: via literature review. Step 2: survey: participants were asked about research priorities thereby expanding initial list of 20 evidence gaps to 30. Step 3: development of an analytic framework. Step 4: prioritization survey with forced-ranking prioritization method: participants had 10 votes to allocate, top 10 future research needs were identified. Step 5: horizon scan: for top 10 research needs. Step 6: for each top-tier future research priority study team considered advantages and disadvantages of various potential study designs

Which stakeholders took part?

Clinical experts and researchers in DCIS management strategies, representatives from federal and nongovernmental funding agencies, representatives from relevant professional societies, health care decision makers and policymakers, and representatives from related consumer and patient advocacy groups.

How were stakeholders recruited?

No information provided.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.