Trial reportTrials2010
The Chest Pain Choice trial: a pilot randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with chest pain in the emergency department.
Trial report in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01077037 (Impact of a Decision Aid on Patient Participation in Decision Making and Resource Use in Low Risk Chest Pain Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Impact of a Decision Aid on Patient Participation in Decision Making and Resource Use in Low Risk Chest Pain Patients: A Randomized Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Pooled it
- Peering into the black box: a meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters.Implementation science : IS · 2014Pooled it
- Shared decision making in patients with low risk chest pain: prospective randomized pragmatic trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016Trial
- Trial
- Comparison of usual care and the HEART score for effectively and safely discharging patients with low-risk chest pain in the emergency department: would the score always help?Clinical cardiology · 2020Observational
- Provider Driven Follow-Up in a Chest Pain Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol: Round Two of the PDSA Cycle in a Multidisciplinary Quality Improvement Patient Safety Project.Spartan medical research journal · 2020Article
- Putting Meaning into Meaningful Use: A Roadmap to Successful Integration of Evidence at the Point of Care.JMIR medical informatics · 2016Article
- SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013 · on this mapArticle
- Insights from a conference on implementing comparative effectiveness research through shared decision-making.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2013Article
- 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
13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest pain is a common presenting complaint in the emergency department (ED). Despite the frequency with which clinicians evaluate patients with chest pain, accurately determining the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and sharing risk information with patients is challenging. The aims of this study are (1) to develop a decision aid (CHEST PAIN CHOICE) that communicates the short-term risk of ACS and (2) to evaluate the impact of the decision aid on patient participation in decision-making and resource use. METHODS/
designThis is a protocol for a parallel, 2-arm randomized trial to compare an intervention group receiving CHEST PAIN CHOICE to a control group receiving usual ED care. Adults presenting to the Saint Mary's Hospital ED in Rochester, MN USA with a primary complaint of chest pain who are being considered for admission for prolonged ED observation in a specialized unit and urgent cardiac stress testing will be eligible for enrollment. We will measure the effect of CHEST PAIN CHOICE on six outcomes: (1) patient knowledge regarding their short-term risk for ACS and the risks of radiation exposure; (2) quality of the decision making process; (3) patient and clinician acceptability and satisfaction with the decision aid; (4) the proportion of patients who decided to undergo observation unit admission and urgent cardiac stress testing; (5) economic costs and healthcare utilization; and (6) the rate of delayed or missed ACS. To capture these outcomes, we will administer patient and clinician surveys after each visit, obtain video recordings of the clinical encounters, and conduct 30-day phone follow-up. DISCUSSION: This pilot randomized trial will develop and evaluate a decision aid for use in ED chest pain patients at low risk for ACS and provide a preliminary estimate of its effect on patient participation in decision-making and resource use.
trial registrationClinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01077037.
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.