Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011
Risk communication methods in hip fracture prevention: a randomised trial in primary care.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Primary healthcare providers challenged during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening Strategies for Men.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2016Article
- Communicating risk to patients and the public.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Article
- Patients' expectations of screening and preventive treatments.Annals of family medicineArticle
- How Synthesis Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.MDM policy & practiceReview
- Scope, Methods, and Overview Findings for the Making Numbers Meaningful Evidence Review of Communicating Probabilities in Health: A Systematic Review.MDM policy & practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment acceptance by patients is influenced by the way treatment effects are presented. Presentation of benefits using relative risk increases treatment acceptance compared to the use of absolute risk. It is not known whether this effect is modified by prior presentation of a patient's individualised risk estimate or how presentation of treatment harms by relative or absolute risk affects acceptance.
aimTo compare acceptance of a hypothetical treatment to prevent hip fracture after presentation of the treatment's benefit in relative or absolute terms in the context of a personal fracture risk estimate, and to reassess acceptance following subsequent presentation of harm in relative or absolute terms. DESIGN AND
settingRandomised controlled trial of patients recruited from 10 GPs' lists in Christchurch, New Zealand.
methodWomen aged ≥ 50 years were invited to participate. Participants were given a personal 10-year hip fracture risk estimate and randomised to receive information on a hypothetical treatment's benefit and harm in relative or absolute terms.
resultsOf the 1140 women invited to participate 393 (34%) took part. Treatment acceptance was greater following presentation of benefit using absolute terms than relative terms after adjustment forage, education, previous osteoporosis diagnosis, and self-reported risk (OR 1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10 to 2.73, P = 0.018). Presentation of the treatment's harmful effect in relative terms led to a greater proportion of participants declining treatment than did presentation in absolute terms (OR 4.89, 95% CI = 2.3 to 11.0, P<0.001).
conclusionPresentation of treatment benefit and harm using absolute risk estimates led to greater treatment acceptance than presentation of the same information in relative terms.
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.