Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28597375›Full record

ArticleThe patient2017

Preferences for Health Interventions: Improving Uptake, Adherence, and Efficiency.

Jan Ostermann, Derek S Brown, Esther W de Bekker-Grob, Axel C Mühlbacher, Shelby D Reed

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Preferences for Genetic Testing to Predict the Risk of Developing Hereditary Cancer: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Jan OstermannDepartment of Health Services Policy and Management, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Discovery Bldg., Ste. 358, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA. jano@mailbox.sc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8236-9500
Derek S BrownWashington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Esther W de Bekker-GrobSection of Health Technology Assessment and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Axel C MühlbacherProfessur Gesundheitsökonomie und Medizinmanagement, Hochschule Neubrandenburg, Neubrandenburg, Germany.
Shelby D ReedCenter for Clinical and Genetic Economics, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Does preference-based HIV testing increase uptake in high risk populations?R01MH106388 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI OSTERMANN, JAN, THIELMAN, NATHAN M · 2015 to 2019
$2.8M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH106388
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMalePatient Preference

Identifiers

PMID28597375
PMCPMC5534371

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.