Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30823872›Full record

ArticleBMC nephrology2019

Family dynamics in a multi-ethnic Asian society: comparison of elderly CKD patients and their family caregivers experience with medical decision making for managing end stage kidney disease.

Semra Ozdemir, Tazeen H Jafar, Lina Hui Lin Choong, Eric Andrew Finkelstein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nephrology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Semra OzdemirLien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
Tazeen H JafarProgramme in Health Services and Systems Research Programme, Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
Lina Hui Lin ChoongDepartment of Renal Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
Eric Andrew FinkelsteinLien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore. eric.finkelstein@duke-nus.edu.sg.
Duke-NUS Medical School · SGSingapore General Hospital · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElderly end stage kidney patients face a decision concerning whether or not to initiate dialysis. In Asia, this decision is highly influenced by family caregivers. The objective of this paper was to understand patients' experience with and preferences for family involvement in treatment decisions, and via a series of hypothetical vignettes, to identify whether there was discordance in treatment preferences between patients and their caregivers, and how any potential conflicts were reconciled.

methodsWe conducted a survey with 151 elderly (aged ≥65) chronic kidney disease patients and their caregivers at outpatient renal clinics. The survey asked, when making treatment decisions, whom they wish makes the final decisions (i.e., preference) and who usually makes the final decisions (i.e., experience). The survey also presented a series of choice vignettes for managing patient's condition and asked respondents to choose between two hypothetical treatment profiles in each vignette. Patients and caregivers were first interviewed separately in tandem, and then were brought together to choose a treatment jointly for vignettes where the initial treatment choice differed within the dyad. We used multivariate regressions to investigate the predictors of discordance and reconciliation.

resultsWe found that most (51%) patients preferred and experienced (64%) significant involvement from caregivers. However, 38% of patients preferred to make final decisions alone but only 27% of patients did. In the hypothetical vignettes, caregivers chose the more intensive option (i.e., dialysis) more than patients did (26% vs 19%; p < 0.01). Overall, 44% of the dyads had discordance in at least 3 vignettes, and the odds of discordance within patient-caregiver dyads was higher when caregivers chose dialysis or treatment with the higher cost (p < 0.01). In half the cases, discordance resolved in the patients' favor, and this was more likely to be the case if the patient was employed and wanted to be in charge of final decisions (p < 0.01).

conclusionsOur results highlight the important role of caregivers in decision-making but also the potential for them to overstep. Clinicians should be aware of this challenge and identify strategies that minimize the chances that patients may receive treatments not consistent with their preferences.

Indexed as

Decision MakingFamily RelationsKidney Failure, ChronicRenal DialysisAgedAsian PeopleCaregiversChoice BehaviorClinical Decision-MakingEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceQualitative ResearchDecision makingElderlyEnd stage kidney diseaseFamily caregiversTreatment preferences

Identifiers

PMID30823872
PMCPMC6397496
OpenAlexW2920640380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.