Trial reportJournal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research2017
Shared decision-making following disclosure of coronary heart disease genetic risk: results from a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01936675 (Myocardial Infarction Genes), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Myocardial Infarction Genes (MI-GENES) Study - Using Genomic Data to Refine Risk Assessment for Heart Attack
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shared Decision-Making in Cardiovascular Risk Factor Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- An electronic review of clinical outcomes after return of actionable genetic research results from a health system research biobank.European journal of medical genetics · 2025Trial
- A randomized study of digital versus genetic counselor return of actionable genetic research results to biobank participants (RESPECT3 study).BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making Tools Implemented in the Electronic Health Record: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Simplified rules-based tool to facilitate the application of up-to-date management recommendations in cardio-oncology.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Patient similarity and other artificial intelligence machine learning algorithms in clinical decision aid for shared decision-making in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity (PACT): a feasibility trial design.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.PloS one · 2022Article
- The genetic interactions between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and cardiovascular diseases.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Review
- Coronary Artery Disease Genetics Enlightened by Genome-Wide Association Studies.JACC. Basic to translational science · 2021Review
- Integrating Option Grid Patient Decision Aids in the Epic Electronic Health Record: Case Study at 5 Health Systems.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- How Do We Incorporate Polygenic Risk Scores in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment and Management?Current atherosclerosis reports · 2021Review
- Polygenic Scores to Assess Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Clinical Perspectives and Basic Implications.Circulation research · 2020Review
- Pregnant women's views on how to promote the use of a decision aid for Down syndrome prenatal screening: a theory-informed qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Effect of Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease on Information Seeking and Sharing: The MI-GENES Study (Myocardial Infarction Genes).Circulation. Cardiovascular genetics · 2017Article
- Examining the Impact of Polygenic Risk Information in Primary Care.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Whether disclosure of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) influences shared decision-making (SDM) regarding use of statins to reduce CHD risk is unknown. We randomized 207 patients, age 45-65 years, at intermediate CHD risk, and not on statins, to receive the 10-year risk of CHD based on conventional risk factors alone (n=103) or in combination with a genetic risk score (n=104). A genetic counselor disclosed this information followed by a physician visit for SDM regarding statin therapy. A novel decision aid was used in both encounters to disclose the CHD risk estimates and facilitate SDM regarding statin use. Patients reported their decision quality and physician visit satisfaction using validated surveys. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the SDM score, satisfaction with the clinical encounter, perception of the quality of the discussion or of participation in decision-making and physician visit satisfaction scores. Quantitative analyses of a random subset of 80 video-recorded encounters using the OPTION5 scale also showed no significant difference in SDM between the two groups. Disclosure of CHD genetic risk using an electronic health record-linked decision aid did not adversely affect SDM or patients' satisfaction with the clinical encounter. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01936675; Results.
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.