Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31542737›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Decision support intervention (Plan Well Guide) for patients and their substitute decision-makers to improve engagement in advance care planning: protocol for a randomised trial.

Michelle Howard, Marissa Slaven, Carrie Bernard, Sayem Borhan, Dawn Elston, Neha Arora, Amy Tan, Daren K Heyland

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
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 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT03239639 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomized Control Trial of an Advance Care Planning Intervention to Engaged Substitute Decision-makers in Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2018 to 2019Enrolled61ConditionsChronic IllnessArmsAdvance care planning education session, Wait list control
NCT05024903 phase2 / phase3terminatednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Trial of a Novel E-health Platform (Plan Well GuideTM)

TypeinterventionalSponsorDaren K. HeylandRan2021 to 2022Enrolled31ConditionsAging Well, Decision Making, Illness, CriticalArmsSerious illness medical planning plus the novel e-health platform (PWG 2.0), Standard of care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Michelle HowardFamily Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada mhoward@mcmaster.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-8127-5492
Marissa SlavenFamily Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Carrie BernardFamily and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sayem BorhanFamily Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Dawn ElstonFamily Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Neha AroraFamily Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Amy TanDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Daren K HeylandCritical Care, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

CIHR PHE-135930
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this randomised trial is to evaluate the efficacy of a decision support intervention for serious illness decisions (the Plan Well Guide decision aid; www.PlanWellguide.com) in increasing the engagement of substitute decision-makers (SDMs) in the patient's advance care planning process (ie, 'ACP engagement'), specifically the SDM's confidence and readiness for the role in the future. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a parallel group randomised controlled trial. We aim to enrol 90 participant dyads: patients aged 65 years and older attending outpatient healthcare settings and with indicators they would be at high risk of needing future medical decisions and their SDM. The intervention is the Plan Well Guide decision aid, administered to the patient by a facilitator, with the SDM present. The primary endpoint is change after 3 months in the SDM's ACP engagement using a validated measure of behavioural change (SDM's knowledge, contemplation, self-efficacy and readiness) to enact the role. The secondary endpoints are (1) ACP engagement of the patient measured by a validated survey; (2) change in SDM decisional conflict regarding involvement in future decision-making and (3) postintervention patient decisional conflict regarding preference for life-sustaining treatments. Primary and secondary continuous outcomes will be analysed using the linear regression. The mean difference and 95% CIs will be reported. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was received August 2017 (2017-3714-GRA) from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board. We plan to disseminate trial results in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences, and via our web-based knowledge translation platforms. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03239639; Pre-results.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalProxyAdvance Care PlanningAgedFemaleHumansMalePatient ParticipationRandomized Controlled Trials as Topiccommunicationdecision aiddecision makingend of liferandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID31542737
PMCPMC6756453

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.