Development and evaluation of decision-support tools in the clinic

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    DISCUS: Development and evaluation of decision-support tools in routine oncology clinical practice

  • IRAS ID

    342946

  • Contact name

    Corinne Faivre-Finn

  • Contact email

    corinne.finn@nhs.net

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Manchester

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    NA, NA

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 0 months, 0 days

  • Research summary

    The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding of the decision-making processes around prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) treatment in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) through a comprehensive practice and needs assessment. There is a lack of research relating to the decision-making processes in the field of PCI and SCLC. This research will therefore fill a gap and develop deeper knowledge around the needs of stakeholders when making treatment decisions in SCLC.

    The study will consist of 2 parts: recording of the consultations to gain insight into real practice and interviews with patients and supporters (family or friends who might not necessarily care for the patient, but supported them during the consultation) on their perceptions and experiences so that we may identify their priorities when making treatment decisions. All interviews and recordings will be analysed using qualitative methods.

    Eligibility criteria include patients with SCLC undergoing standard of care treatment, clinical staff involved with PCI decision-making, and personal support ie family or friends who were involved in the PCI decision with the patient. The study will be conducted at The Christie NHS Foundation Trust or online via Teams and will last for 12 months.

    Ultimately, this will provide the crucial information required to develop an intervention to support shared decision- making (SDM) between stakeholders when considering PCI or clinical trials. Thus, it will aid the development of an SDM intervention prototype. It is likely that the results will suggest the need to include a resource for patients to understand what is important to them when making such decisions. It may also help professionals to have these difficult conversations with patients and support their integration in current practice.

  • REC name

    North West - Greater Manchester Central Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    25/NW/0160

  • Date of REC Opinion

    16 Jun 2025

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion