ArticleAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine2016
Thinking Forward: Future-oriented Thinking among Patients with Tobacco-associated Thoracic Diseases and Their Surrogates.
Article in American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Supporting shared decision making for older people with multiple health and social care needs: a realist synthesis.BMC geriatrics · 2018Pooled it
- Effect of Intensivist Communication in a Simulated Setting on Interpretation of Prognosis Among Family Members of Patients at High Risk of Intensive Care Unit Admission: A Randomized Trial.JAMA network open · 2020Trial
- Accuracy of Expected Symptoms and Subsequent Quality of Life Measures Among Adults With COPD.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Comparing Smoking Cessation Interventions among Underserved Patients Referred for Lung Cancer Screening: A Pragmatic Trial Protocol.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2022Article
- From Harmful Treatment to Secondary Gain: Adverse Event Reporting in Dyspepsia and Gastroparesis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Article
- "We Understand the Prognosis, but We Live with Our Heads in the Clouds": Understanding Patient and Family Outcome Expectations and Their Influence on Shared Decision Making.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleThe goal of shared decision making is to match patient preferences, including evaluation of potential future outcomes, with available management options. Yet, it is unknown how patients with smoking-related thoracic diseases or their surrogates display future-oriented thinking.
objectivesTo document prevalent themes in patients' and potential surrogate decision makers' future-oriented thinking when facing preference-sensitive choices.
methodsWe conducted 44 scenario-based semistructured interviews among a diverse group of outpatients with smoking-associated thoracic diseases and potential surrogates for whom one of three preference-sensitive decisions would be medically relevant. Using content analysis, we documented prevalent themes to understand how these individuals display future-oriented thinking. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsPatients and potential surrogates generally expressed expectations for future outcomes but also acknowledged their limitations in doing so. When thinking about potential outcomes, decision makers relied on past experiences, including those only loosely related; perceived familiarity with treatment options; and spirituality. The content of these expectations included effects on family, emotional predictions, and prognostication. For surrogates, a tension existed between hope-based and fact-based expectations.
conclusionsPatients and surrogates may struggle to generate expectations, and these future-oriented thoughts may be based on loosely related past experiences or unrealistic optimism. These tendencies may lead to errors, preventing selection of treatments that promote true preferences. Clinicians should explore how decision makers engage in future-oriented thinking and what their expectations are as a component of the shared decision-making process. Future research should evaluate whether targeted guidance in future-oriented thinking may improve outcomes important to patients.
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.