Trial reportBMC medical informatics and decision making2007
Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey.
Trial report in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of statins on average survival in randomised trials, an analysis of end point postponement.BMJ open · 2015Pooled it
- Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Length of time periods in treatment effect descriptions and willingness to initiate preventive therapy: a randomised survey experiment.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Trial
- Time-to-event versus ten-year-absolute-risk in cardiovascular risk prevention - does it make a difference? Results from the Optimizing-Risk-Communication (OptRisk) randomized-controlled trial.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Trial
- Communicating risk using absolute risk reduction or prolongation of life formats: cluster-randomised trial in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Trial
- Impact of effectiveness information format on patient choice of therapy and satisfaction with decisions about chronic disease medication: the "Influence of intervention Methodologies on Patient Choice of Therapy (IMPACT)" cluster-randomised trial in general practice.BMC health services research · 2013Trial
- Therapeutic decisions by number needed to treat and survival gains: a cross-sectional survey of lipid-lowering drug recommendations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011Trial
- Communicating effectiveness of intervention for chronic diseases: what single format can replace comprehensive information?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2008Trial
- The effect of a new lifetime-cardiovascular-risk display on patients' motivation to participate in shared decision-making.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Article
- Decisions on statin therapy by patients' opinions about survival gains: cross sectional survey of general practitioners.BMC family practice · 2015Article
- A proposal for an additional clinical trial outcome measure assessing preventive effect as delay of events.European journal of epidemiology · 2012Article
- Evaluation of benefit-risk.PharmacoEconomics · 2010Article
- Development of life-expectancy tables for people with type 2 diabetes.European heart journal · 2009Article
- Laypersons' understanding of relative risk reductions: randomised cross-sectional study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2008Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor shared decision making doctors need to communicate the effectiveness of therapies such that patients can understand it and discriminate between small and large effects. Previous research indicates that patients have difficulties in understanding risk measures. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that lay people may be able to discriminate between therapies when their effectiveness is expressed in terms of postponement of an adverse disease event.
methodsIn 2004 a random sample of 1,367 non-institutionalized Danes aged 40+ was interviewed in person. The participants were asked for demographic information and asked to consider a hypothetical preventive drug treatment. The respondents were randomized to the magnitude of treatment effectiveness (heart attack postponement of 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, 2 years, 4 years and 8 years) and subsequently asked whether they would take such a therapy. They were also asked whether they had hypercholesterolemia or had experienced a heart attack.
resultsIn total 58% of the respondents consented to the hypothetical treatment. The proportions accepting treatment were 39%, 52%, 56%, 64%, 67% and 73% when postponement was 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, 2 years, 4 years and 8 years respectively. Participants who thought that the effectiveness information was difficult to understand, were less likely to consent to therapy (p = 0.004).
conclusionLay people can discriminate between levels of treatment effectiveness when they are presented in terms of postponement of an adverse event. The results indicate that such postponement is a comprehensible measure of effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.