ArticlePloS one2018
Development and pilot of a decision-aid for patients with bipolar II disorder and their families making decisions about treatment options to prevent relapse.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- A Brief Web-Based Person-Centered Care Group Training Program for the Management of Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial in Spain.JMIR medical education · 2025Trial
- Improving treatment decision-making in bipolar II disorder: a phase II randomised controlled trial of an online patient decision-aid.BMC psychiatry · 2020Trial
- Codesigning an Online Psychotherapeutic Intervention for Carers of People With Cancer-A Qualitative Study of Carer Needs and Perspectives on Psychological Support.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Development and user testing of a patient decision aid for cancer patients considering treatment for anxiety or depression.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Comparison of analog and digital patient decision aids for the treatment of depression: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Barriers to family involvement in the care of patients with chronic mental illnesses: A qualitative study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for patients with generalised anxiety disorder: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Preferences of Information Dissemination on Treatment for Bipolar Disorder: Patient-Centered Focus Group Study.JMIR mental health · 2019Article
- Giving Patients Choices During Involuntary Admission: A New Intervention.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Phase II Randomised Controlled Trial of a patient decision-aid website to improve treatment decision-making for young adults with bipolar II disorder: A feasibility study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTreatment decisions in bipolar II disorder (BPII) are finely-balanced and sensitive to patient preferences. This pilot study evaluated a decision-aid booklet (DA) for patients with BPII (and their family) to obtain evidence on its acceptability, feasibility, safety, and usefulness in potential end-users.
methodsThe DA booklet was developed according to International Patient Decision-Aid Standards. Thirty-one patients diagnosed with BPII and their families (n = 11), who were currently making or had previously made treatment decisions, participated. Participants read the DA and completed validated and purpose-designed questionnaires. A follow-up semi-structured telephone interview elicited more in-depth DA feedback (n = 40).
resultsPatients and family endorsed the DA booklet as: easy-to-use (100% agree), useful in treatment decision-making (100%), presenting balanced (patients = 96.8%, family = 100%), up-to-date (93.5%, 100%) and trustworthy information (93.5%, 100%) that did not provoke anxiety (93.5%, 90.9%). All participants stated that they would recommend the DA to others. Following DA use, all except one participant (97.6%) demonstrated adequate treatment knowledge (> 50% score). Patients reported low decisional conflict (M = 18.90/100) following DA use and felt well-prepared to make treatment decisions (M = 4.28/5). Most patients (90.3%) indicated uptake of treatments consistent with the best available clinical evidence. Additionally, a large proportion of patients made an informed choice about medication (65.5%) with adjunctive psychological treatment (50.0%), based on adequate knowledge and their treatment values. Interview findings further supported the DA's acceptability among participants. DISCUSSION: Pilot findings indicate that patients with BPII and their family consider this DA booklet highly acceptable and useful in making evidence-based treatment decisions that align with their treatment preferences.
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.