ArticlePloS one2013
Decision-making in multiple sclerosis consultations in Italy: third observer and patient assessments.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- A pilot study to improve adherence among MS patients who discontinue treatment against medical advice.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2016Trial
- Trial
- Communication competences of multiple sclerosis neurologists during advance care planning conversations: A multi-observer study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Insights for Healthcare Providers on Shared Decision-Making in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Neurology and therapy · 2024Review
- Challenges in physician-patient communication for optimal management of systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease: a discourse analysis.Clinical rheumatology · 2020Article
- Conversion to Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: Patient Awareness and Needs. Results From an Online Survey in Italy and Germany.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- Patient Power Revolution in Multiple Sclerosis: Navigating the New Frontier.Neurology and therapy · 2018Article
- Patient Perceptions Correlate Weakly With Observed Patient Involvement in Decision-making in Orthopaedic Surgery.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2018Observational
- Generating the perception of choice: the remarkable malleability of option-listing.Sociology of health & illness · 2018Article
- Article
- Development and assessment of a website presenting evidence-based information for people with multiple sclerosis: the IN-DEEP project.BMC neurology · 2016Article
- Patient expression of emotions and neurologist responses in first multiple sclerosis consultations.PloS one · 2015Article
- Article
- The Transition to Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: An Exploratory Qualitative Study of Health Professionals' Experiences.International journal of MS careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess decision-making in multiple sclerosis (MS) from third observer and patient perspectives.
methodAudio recordings of first-ever consultations with a participating physician (88 outpatients, 10 physicians) at four tertiary MS care clinics in Italy, were rated by a third observer using the Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making (OPTION) and by patients using the Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS).
resultsMean patient age was 37.5, 66% were women, 72% had MS, and 28% had possible MS or other disease. Mean PICS subscale scores (range 0 poor, 100 best possible) were 71.9 (SD 24.3) for "physician facilitation" (PICS-F); 74.6 (SD 22.9) for "patient information exchange" (PICS-I); and only 22.5 (SD 16.2) for "patient decision making" (PICS-DM). Mean OPTION total score (0 poor, 100 best possible) was 29.6 (SD 10.3). Poorest OPTION scores were found for items assessing "preferred patient approach to receiving information" and "preferred patient level of involvement." Highest scores were for "clinician drawing attention to identified problem", "indicating need for decision making," and "need to review the decision." Consultation time, woman physician, patient-physician gender concordance and PICS-F were associated with higher OPTION total score; older physician and second opinion consultation were associated with lower OPTION score.
conclusionsIn line with findings in other settings, our third observer findings indicated limited patient involvement abilities of MS physicians during first consultations. Patient perceptions of physician skills were better than third observers', although they correlated. Consultations with women physicians, and younger physicians, were associated with higher third observer and patient-based scores. Our findings reveal a need to empower Italian MS physicians with better communication and shared decision-making skills, and show in particular that attention to MS patient preferences for reception of information and involvement in health decisions, need to be improved.
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.