Trial reportInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
The role of a novel decision aid to support informed decision making process in patients with a symptomatic non - lower pole renal stone < 20 mm in diameter: a prospective randomized study.
Trial report in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Development and validation of a questionnaire for the knowledge assessment and management of PLADO diet in kidney and healthy population in Cyprus.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of a novel decision aid (DA) in improving the patients' level of knowledge and decreasing decisional conflicts while deciding for SWL vs. RIRS in case of a symptomatic renal stone < 2 cm. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective randomized study patients were randomized to receive either standard informing process (group 1, n=57) or DA (group 2, n=58). Level of knowledge was assessed with a questionnaire of 10 questions before and after patient informing process. Level of decisional conflict was assessed with a previously validated scoring system. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with adequate level of knowledge.
resultsLevel of knowledge increased significantly in both groups after patient informing process. The increase was significantly more prominent in group 2 (p=0.045). Percentage of patients with adequate knowledge was also higher in group 2 (56.1%vs.74.1%, p=0.04). Mean decisional conflict scale score (higher score indicates higher decisional conflict level) was also significantly higher in group1 (14.7±14.5 vs. 10.1±13.7, p=0.045). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed higher education level (college degree) and use of DA as factors associated with adequate level of knowledge.
conclusionsIn the current study, The DA was shown to have a positive impact on level of knowledge and diminish the level of decisional conflict for patients with a symptomatic non-lower pole renal stone < 20 mm. We recommend development and use of DAs for particular clinic scenarios to aid in education of patients and shared decision making process in stone disease clinics.
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.