ArticleNeurology and therapy2018
Patient Power Revolution in Multiple Sclerosis: Navigating the New Frontier.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insights for Healthcare Providers on Shared Decision-Making in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Neurology and therapy · 2024Review
- Correlation between patient-reported manual ability and three objective measures of upper limb function in people with multiple sclerosis.European journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Article
- An ID-Associated Application to Facilitate Patient-Tailored Management of Multiple Sclerosis.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Concordance Between Persons with Multiple Sclerosis and Treating Physician on Medication Effects and Health Status.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- A Bio-Psycho-Social Co-created Intervention for Young Adults With Multiple Sclerosis (ESPRIMO): Rationale and Study Protocol for a Feasibility Study.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Measuring outcomes that matter most to people with multiple sclerosis: the role of patient-reported outcomes.Current opinion in neurology · 2020Review
- Psychometric Properties of the SymptoMScreen Questionnaire in a Mild Disability Population of Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Quantifying the Patient's Perspective.Neurology and therapy · 2020Article
- Knowledge Is Power, but Is Ignorance Bliss? Optimising Conversations About Disease Progression in Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology and therapy · 2020Article
- Assessing Pharmacists' Preferences towards Efficacy Attributes of Disease-Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Joint Healthcare Professional and Patient Development of Communication Tools to Improve the Standard of MS Care.Advances in therapy · 2019Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A debate on shared decision making in multiple sclerosis (MS) was led by a patient advocate and leading neurologists from the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group. Key themes and salient points which emerged from the debate and audience discussions are reported in this article. Arguments against shared decision making included the fact that physicians study and practice for years to reach their level of expertise, and that the level of understanding required to make these decisions may not be possible to communicate to patients within time-limited consultations. Furthermore, unreliable online information, information overload or information with marketing bias may also cloud patients' judgements. Arguments for patient engagement focussed on how ownership of decisions can lead to improved adherence and outcomes, and a strengthening of the physician-patient relationship. Shared decision making requires educating patients to make informed decisions and to understand the risks and consequences of their choices. However, shared decision making may not be the correct option for every patient, and the level of involvement must be driven by the patient. To support patients' engagement and promote responsible management of their condition, physicians need to (1) foster and maintain a positive, ongoing relationship with their patients, and (2) provide patients with timely, accurate, and understandable information. There was broad agreement that the patient voice should be heard more in discussions around the future of MS care. MS in the 21st Century offers a model for patient involvement in partnership with MS healthcare specialists, and the steering group is currently considering these issues and developing tools and solutions to enhance patient-physician communication and relationships. Funding Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.
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.