ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2019
Evaluating shared decision-making in periviable counseling using objective structured clinical examinations.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- "It feels like you have to choose one or the other": a qualitative analysis of obstetrician focus groups on periviability counseling.Journal of perinatal medicine · 2024Article
- Association of Active Postnatal Care With Infant Survival Among Periviable Infants in the US.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Evaluating Shared Decision-Making in Postpartum Contraceptive Counseling Using Objective Structured Clinical Examinations.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Decision-making in imminent extreme premature births: perceived shared decision-making, parental decisional conflict and decision regret.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- User-testing of a decision-support tool for parents facing threatened periviable delivery: The Periviable GOALS decision aid.Patient education and counseling · 2021Article
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
objectiveTo develop and test an Objective Structured Clinical Examination to evaluate the use of shared decision-making (SDM) in periviable counseling among fourth-year OB/GYN residents.
methodsResidents counseled a standardized patient presenting with preterm premature rupture of membranes at 23 weeks' gestation. Braddock's 9-item measure of SDM was adapted to a 10-item scoring rubric; rating each: 0 (absent), 1 (partial), or 2 (complete).
resultsTwenty-six residents participated. All provided "complete" discussions of the clinical issue and "complete" or 'partial' ratings for informing the woman of her prognosis (62 and 38%, respectively) and addressing her role in decision-making (42 and 50%). Discussions of her goals and preferences were often absent (69 and 62%). Only 42% discussed uncertainties.
conclusionCritical elements of SDM related to a woman's values, goals and preferences were not explored when counseling about periviable delivery. Training in SDM is needed to advance communication skills for complex clinical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30944399What 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.