Trial reportJAMA network open2020
Effect of Intensivist Communication in a Simulated Setting on Interpretation of Prognosis Among Family Members of Patients at High Risk of Intensive Care Unit Admission: A Randomized Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04239209 (The Effect of Intensivist Communication on Prognosis Interpretation by Family Members of Patients at High Risk for Intensive Care Unit Admission), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
The Effect of Intensivist Communication on Prognosis Interpretation by Family Members of Patients at High Risk for Intensive Care Unit Admission: A Randomized Trial
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Family-Centered Care for Adult ICUs: 2024.Critical care medicine · 2025Guideline
- How prognostic information influences care planning in adult intensive care units: protocol for a realist review.BMJ open · 2026Article
- The Perspectives of Families in Decision-Making Conflicts Related to Palliative Care Patients With Mechanical Ventilation in Taiwan.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2026Article
- One voice at the bedside: aligning goals of care and prognostic communication in trauma and acute care surgery.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Article
- Article
- Identification of unmet information needs among families of critically ill patients and their association with post-intensive care syndrome-family: protocol for a single-center cross-sectional study.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Shared Decision-Making Communication and Prognostic Misunderstanding in the ICU.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Early Shared Decision-Making for Older Adults with Traumatic Brain Injury: Using Time-Limited Trials and Understanding Their Limitations.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Palliative Care Across the Life Span for Children With Heart Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2023Review
- Examining the Role of Race in End-of-Life Care in the Intensive Care Unit: A Single-Center Observational Study.Palliative medicine reports · 2023Article
- Intensivists' perceptions of what is missing in their compassionate care during interactions in the intensive care unit.BMC health services research · 2022Observational
- Primary palliative care recommendations for critical care clinicians.Journal of intensive care · 2022Review
- Assessment of Discordance Between Physicians and Family Members Regarding Prognosis in Patients With Severe Acute Brain Injury.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Putting Prognosis First: Impact of an Intensive Care Unit Team Premeeting Curriculum.ATS scholar · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Discordance about prognosis between a patient's health care decision-making surrogate and the treating intensivist is common in the intensive care unit (ICU). Empowering families, friends, and caregivers of patients who are critically ill to make informed decisions about care is important, but it is unclear how best to communicate prognostic information to surrogates when a patient is expected to die. Objective: To determine whether family members, who are often health care decision-making surrogates, interpret intensivists as being more optimistic when questions about prognosis in the ICU are answered indirectly. Design, Setting, and Participants: This web-based randomized trial was conducted between September 27, 2019, and October 17, 2019, among a national sample of adult children, spouses, partners, or siblings of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who were receiving long-term oxygen therapy. Participants were shown video vignettes depicting an intensivist answering a standardized question about the prognosis of a patient at high risk of death on day 3 of ICU admission. Participants were excluded if they had worked as a physician, nurse, or advanced health care practitioner. Data were analyzed from October 18, 2019, to November 12, 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized to view 1 of 4 intensivist communication styles in response to the question "What do you think is most likely to happen?": (1) a direct response (control), (2) an indirect response comparing the patient's condition with that of other patients, (3) an indirect response describing the patient's deteriorating physiological condition, or (4) redirection to a discussion of the patient's values and goals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participant responses to 2 questions: (1) "If you had to guess, what do you think the doctor thinks is the chance that your loved one will survive this hospitalization?" and (2) "What do you think are the chances that your loved one will survive this hospitalization?" answered using a 0% to 100% probability scale. Results: Among 302 participants (median [interquartile range] age, 49 [38-59] years; 204 [68%] women) included in the trial, 165 (55%) were adult children of the individual with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; 77 participants were randomized to view a direct response, 77 participants were randomized to view an indirect response referencing other patients, 68 participants were randomized to view an indirect response referencing physiological condition, and 80 participants were randomized to view a redirection response. Compared with participants who viewed a direct response, participants who viewed an indirect response referencing other patients (β = 10 [95% CI, 1-19]; P = .03), physiological condition (β = 10 [95% CI, 0-19]; P = .04), or redirection to a discussion of the patient's values and goals (β = 19 [95% CI, 10-28]; P < .001) perceived the intensivist to have a significantly more optimistic prognostic estimate. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that family members interpret indirect or redirection responses to questions about prognosis in the ICU setting as more optimistic than direct responses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04239209.
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.