ArticlePsycho-social medicine2009
Development of a patient decision aid for prevention of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes - rationale, design and pilot testing.
Article in Psycho-social medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Informed shared decision-making programme for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2018 · on this mapTrial
- Informed shared decision-making programme on the prevention of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2015 · on this mapTrial
- An informed shared decision making programme on the prevention of myocardial infarction for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care: protocol of a cluster randomised, controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2015Trial
- An evidence-based shared decision making programme on the prevention of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes: protocol of a randomised-controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2013Trial
- Design and pilot evaluation of an evidence-based worksheet and clinician guide to facilitate nutrition counselling for patients with severe mental illness.BMC psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDevelopment and testing of a decision aid about prevention of myocardial infarction for persons with type 2 diabetes.
methodsDevelopment and testing were guided by the UK Medical Research Council's guidance for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. This comprised a systematic literature review, a focus group of 9 potential providers, modelling a prototype, interviews to qualitatively explore understanding and additional information needs, and revision of the decision aid.
resultsThe decision aid includes evidence-based information, a tool for individual risk-assessment, worksheets, and an action plan. Five diabetes educators and 15 patients underwent two 60-minutes face-to-face interviews, firstly browsing the decision aid for the first time and then after using it. Both groups differed in their ratings. Overall, the decision aid was rated to present essential information in a complex but understandable and unbiased manner. Difficulties involved understanding of terminology and risk interpretation. "Social status as a risk factor" was the most challenged content by educators but considered as highly important by patients. The risk assessment tool was used inadequately. 5 patients allocated themselves into false risk categories. After revision of the tool, all 12 patients who were recruited for reassessment used the tool correctly.
conclusionThe decision aid was evaluated with diabetes educators and patients. Qualitative data analysis revealed aspects for revision. The decision aid is planned to be part of a shared decision making programme, comprising a strategy for patient counselling and educational modules addressed to providers. Quantitative evaluation is required to assess its 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.