Trial reportJournal of critical care2016
The effect of framing on surrogate optimism bias: A simulation study.
Trial report in Journal of critical care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Randomized Controlled Trial of Behavioral Nudges to Improve Enrollment in Critical Care Trials.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Trial
- Patient Preference to Accept Medical Treatment Is Associated with Spokesperson Agreement.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2019Trial
- Artificial Intelligence to support ethical decision-making for incapacitated patients: a survey among German anesthesiologists and internists.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Optimism bias in understanding neonatal prognoses.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- More than one in three proxies do not know their loved one's current code status: An observational study in a Maryland ICU.PloS one · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo explore the effect of emotion priming and physician communication behaviors on optimism bias. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a 5 × 2 between-subject randomized factorial experiment using a Web-based interactive video designed to simulate a family meeting for a critically ill spouse/parent. Eligibility included age at least 35 years and self-identifying as the surrogate for a spouse/parent. The primary outcome was the surrogate's election of code status. We defined optimism bias as the surrogate's estimate of prognosis with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) > their recollection of the physician's estimate.
resultsOf 373 respondents, 256 (69%) logged in and were randomized and 220 (86%) had nonmissing data for prognosis. Sixty-seven (30%) of 220 overall and 56 of (32%) 173 with an accurate recollection of the physician's estimate had optimism bias. Optimism bias correlated with choosing CPR (P < .001). Emotion priming (P = .397), physician attention to emotion (P = .537), and framing of CPR as the social norm (P = .884) did not affect optimism bias. Framing the decision as the patient's vs the surrogate's (25% vs 36%, P = .066) and describing the alternative to CPR as "allow natural death" instead of "do not resuscitate" (25% vs 37%, P = .035) decreased optimism bias.
conclusionsFraming of CPR choice during code status conversations may influence surrogates' optimism bias.
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.