Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28457025›Full record

ArticleClinical transplantation2017

Decisional conflict between treatment options among end-stage renal disease patients evaluated for kidney transplantation.

Laura McPherson, Mohua Basu, Jennifer Gander, Stephen O Pastan, Sumit Mohan, Michael S Wolf, Mariana Chiles, Allison Russell, Kristie Lipford, Rachel E Patzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical transplantation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Effect of the iChoose Kidney decision aid in improving knowledge about treatment options among transplant candidates: A randomized controlled trial.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2018
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Laura McPhersonDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8135-1408
Mohua BasuDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jennifer GanderDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Stephen O PastanRenal Division, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sumit MohanRenal and Pancreatic Transplant Program, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Michael S WolfDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Mariana ChilesRenal and Pancreatic Transplant Program, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Allison RussellDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Kristie LipfordDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Rachel E PatzerDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Reducing Racial Disparities in Access to Kidney Transplantation: the RaDIANT Regional StudyU01MD010611 · NIMHD · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI PATZER, RACHEL E · 2016 to 2020
$2.8M
NIMHD NIH HHS U01 MD010611
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although kidney transplantation provides a significant benefit over dialysis, many patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are conflicted about their decision to undergo kidney transplant. We aimed to identify the prevalence and characteristics associated with decisional conflict between treatment options in ESRD patients presenting for transplant evaluation. Among a cross-sectional sample of patients with ESRD (n=464) surveyed in 2014 and 2015, we assessed decisional conflict through a validated 10-item questionnaire. Decisional conflict was dichotomized into no decisional conflict (score=0) and any decisional conflict (score>0). We investigated potential characteristics of patients with decisional conflict using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression. The overall mean age was 50.6 years, with 62% male patients and 48% African American patients. Nearly half (48.5%) of patients had decisional conflict regarding treatment options. Characteristics significantly associated with decisional conflict in multivariable analysis included male sex, lower educational attainment, and less transplant knowledge. Understanding characteristics associated with decisional conflict in patients with ESRD could help identify patients who may benefit from targeted interventions to help patients make informed, value-based, and supported decisions when deciding how to best treat their kidney disease.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorConflict, PsychologicalDecision MakingAdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisconflictdialysispatientstransplanttreatmentuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID28457025
PMCPMC10067135

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.