Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27216581›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2017

Side Effect Perceptions and Their Impact on Treatment Decisions in Women.

Erika A Waters, Thorsten Pachur, Graham A Colditz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Variability in Affect and Willingness to Take Medication.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Effects of Emotion on Medical Decisions Involving Tradeoffs.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018
    Article
  15. 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

3 authors.

Erika A WatersDivision of Public Health Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, MO, USA (EAW, GAC).
Thorsten PachurCenter for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development (TP).
Graham A ColditzDivision of Public Health Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, MO, USA (EAW, GAC).

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSide effects prompt some patients to forego otherwise-beneficial therapies. This study explored which characteristics make side effects particularly aversive.

methodsWe used a psychometric approach, originating from research on risk perception, to identify the factors (or components) underlying side effect perceptions. Women ( N = 149) aged 40 to 74 years were recruited from a patient registry to complete an online experiment. Participants were presented with hypothetical scenarios in which an effective and necessary medication conferred a small risk of a single side effect (e.g., nausea, dizziness). They rated a broad range of side effects on several characteristics (e.g., embarrassing, treatable). In addition, we collected 4 measures of aversiveness for each side effect: choosing to take the medication, willingness to pay to avoid the side effect (WTP), negative affective attitude associated with the side effect, and how each side effect ranks among others in terms of undesirability. A principal components analysis (PCA) was used to identify the components underlying side effect perceptions. Then, for each aversiveness measure separately, regression analyses were used to determine which components predicted differences in aversiveness among the side effects.

resultsThe PCA revealed 4 components underlying side effect perceptions: affective challenge (e.g., frightening), social challenge (e.g., disfiguring), physical challenge (e.g., painful), and familiarity (e.g., common). Side effects perceived as affectively and physically challenging elicited the highest levels of aversiveness across all 4 measures.

conclusionsUnderstanding what side effect characteristics are most aversive may inform interventions to improve medical decisions and facilitate the translation of novel biomedical therapies into clinical practice.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdultAgedDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePerceptionPrincipal Component AnalysisPsychometricsRegression AnalysisWomen's Healthaffectmedical decision makingpsychometric paradigmrisk perceptiontradeoff

Identifiers

PMID27216581
PMCPMC5121093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.