Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30833321›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Protocol for the ORaClES study: an online randomised controlled trial to improve clinical estimates of survival using a training resource for medical students.

Linda Oostendorp, Nicola White, Priscilla Harries, Sarah Yardley, Christopher Tomlinson, Federico Ricciardi, Hulya Gokalp, Patrick Stone

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03360812 (Online Randomised Controlled Trial to Improve Clinical Estimates of Survival), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT03360812 nacompletednot on this map

Online Randomised Controlled Trial to Improve Clinical Estimates of Survival (ORaClES)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2018 to 2018Enrolled170ConditionsTerminal IllnessArmsOnline training resource
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

8 authors.

Linda Oostendorp *Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5544-2672
Nicola White *Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7438-0072
Priscilla HarriesCentre for Applied Health and Social Care Research (CAHSCR), Kingston University & St George's, University of London, London, UK.
Sarah YardleyMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
Christopher TomlinsonMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
Federico RicciardiMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4473-7691
Hulya GokalpDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK.
Patrick StoneMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCH-18-UMarie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-U
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClinicians often struggle to recognise when palliative care patients are imminently dying (last 72 hours of life). A previous study identified the factors that expert palliative care doctors (with demonstrated prognostic skills) had used, to form a judgement about which patients were imminently dying. This protocol describes a study to evaluate whether an online training resource showing how experts weighted the importance of various symptoms and signs can teach medical students to formulate survival estimates for palliative care patients that are more similar to the experts' estimates. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This online double-blind randomised controlled trial will recruit at least 128 students in the penultimate or final year of medical school in the UK. Participants are asked to review three series of vignettes describing patients referred to palliative care and provide an estimate about the probability (0%-100%) that each patient will die within 72 hours. After the first series, students randomised to the intervention arm are given access to an online training resource. All participants are asked to complete a second series of vignettes. After 2 weeks, all participants are asked to complete a third series. The primary outcome will be the probability of death estimates (0%-100%) provided by students in the intervention and control arms for the second series of vignettes. Secondary outcomes include the maintenance effect at 2-week follow-up, weighting of individual symptoms and signs, and level of expertise (discrimination and consistency). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval has been obtained from the UCL Research Ethics Committee (8675/002) and local approvals will be obtained as appropriate. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals using an open access format and presented at academic conferences. We will also publicise our findings on the Marie Curie website. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03360812; Pre-results.

Indexed as

JudgmentAdultClinical CompetenceDouble-Blind MethodEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleHumansMalePalliative CarePrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStudents, MedicalTerminally Illend of lifemedical studentsonline training resourcepalliative careprognosisrandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID30833321
PMCPMC6443051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.