Trial reportSaudi medical journal2020
Comparing the use of Arabic decision aid to usual care. A multicenter randomized controlled trial for Arabic speaking metastatic colorectal cancer patients in Saudi Arabia.
Trial report in Saudi medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 5 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A mixed methods systematic review of cancer treatment decision-making in vulnerable populations.Patient education and counseling · 2026Pooled it
- Prognostic understanding interventions in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions to Improve Prognostic Understanding in Advanced Stages of Life-Limiting Illness: A Systematic Review.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2022Pooled it
- Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Consensus statement on the management of metastatic colorectal cancer beyond the second-line therapy in Saudi Arabia.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effect of decision aids (DAs) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients in the Arabic language.
methodsA multi-centered randomized control trial was used to evaluate the effect of Arabic DA use with usual care for mCRC patients compared to usual care alone. Patients were recruited from 4 main oncology centers in Saudi Arabia: King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh; King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh; King Saud Medical City, Riyadh; and King Fahd Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia, between March 2016 and October 2018. The final follow up was in April 2019. The study measured patient understanding of prognosis, treatment options, and the level of the patient's anxiety.
resultsNinety-two patients were included in the analysis; 51 in the intervention group. A small proportion of both (DA with usual care and usual care) understood that mCRC was incurable (8% and 5%) of the 2 groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in anxiety level; however, a time effect both initially and after one month was significantly higher than at 6 month.
conclusionThe study shows that a higher level of patient's baseline understanding lowered anxiety levels over time. Decision aids group presented low levels of anxiety over time than those provided the usual care. We recommend using Arabic DA in the oncology centers dealing with mCRC patients, aiming to empower patients in decision making.
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.