Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21403138›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine

Patients' preferences for ways to communicate benefits of cardiovascular medication.

Felicity Goodyear-Smith, Timothy Kenealy, Susan Wells, Bruce Arroll, Margaret Horsburgh

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Acceptance and practicability of a visual communication tool in smoking cessation counselling: a randomised controlled trial.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2013
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Felicity Goodyear-SmithUniversity of Auckland, New Zealand. f.goodyear-smith@auckland.ac.nz
Timothy Kenealy
Susan Wells
Bruce Arroll
Margaret Horsburgh
University of Auckland · NZAuckland University of Technology · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe wanted to determine patients' willingness to take preventive cardiovascular disease (CVD) medication in relation to their 5-year CVD risk score and modes of communicating benefits of therapy.

methodsStudy participants were 934 consecutive patients drawn from family practitioners' waiting rooms in Auckland, New Zealand, who knew their 5-year CVD risk (ranging from 5% to 30%) and who completed a questionnaire asking them to rate how much various modes of communicating the benefits of therapy would encourage them to take medication daily, where the benefits from medication were proportional to their estimated CVD risk score.

resultsPatients' rankings for modes of communicating the benefits of therapy were little influenced by sex, age, ethnicity, numeracy score, 5-year CVD risk, or concern about a heart attack. Patients clearly found relative risk reduction most encouraging, with absolute risk reduction rated second overall and numbers needed to treat the least likely to be persuasive, although preferences covered the full range and were not predictable from demographic or 5-year CVD risk data. Pictures were preferred to numbers by 55.1%, with a people-chart or a bar chart being equally favored. Even so, 61.8% preferred a doctor's opinion to any presentation by numbers or pictures.

conclusionsPatients' willingness to take preventive cardiovascular medication depends more on mode of communicating treatment benefit than on their short-term CVD risk score or their level of concern about a future cardiovascular event. Because individual preferences were not predictable, more than 1 modality is likely to be clinically useful for each patient.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesCardiovascular SystemDecision MakingFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPatient Education as TopicPatient Preference

Identifiers

PMID21403138
PMCPMC3056859
OpenAlexW2112742408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.