ArticleBMC nephrology2020
Choice of dialysis modality: patients' experiences and quality of decision after shared decision-making.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03868800 (Shared Decision-Making and Dialysis Choice), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 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.
Shared Decision-Making and Dialysis Choice: A Complex Intervention
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Scoping Review on Decision-Making Interventions for Kidney Failure Treatment Options by the Kidney Disease Aging Research Collaborative.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Review
- Shared Decision-Making in Dialysis Modality Selection Among Adults with Advanced Kidney Disease in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Shared decision-making for kidney replacement therapy: a comprehensive review and a proposed model.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Review
- Developing and Evaluating a Home Hemodialysis Training Program-A Quality Improvement Study.Hemodialysis international. International Symposium on Home Hemodialysis · 2025Article
- Shared decision making and dialysis choice: an observational longitudinal cohort study.BMC nephrology · 2025Observational
- Exploring Haemodialysis Nurses' Perceptions on Kidney Replacement Therapy Modality Education: A Framework Analysis.Journal of renal care · 2025Article
- In search of common ground - nephrologists' experiences in preparing and informing patients on the path to end-stage kidney disease.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of the ShareD dEciSIon making for patients with kidney failuRE to improve end-of-life care intervention: A pilot multicentre randomised controlled trial.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024Article
- Exploring Patient Preferences Related to Shared Decision-Making in Chronic Disease Management.Cureus · 2024Article
- The utilization of renal dialysis: a comprehensive study in Saudi Arabia.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Role of SGLT-2 Inhibitors in Ultrafiltration Failure in Peritoneal Dialysis: A Narrative Review.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2024Review
- Measures used to assess interventions for increasing patient involvement in Danish healthcare setting: a rapid review.BMJ open · 2022Review
- Shared decision-making and planning end-of-life care for patients with end-stage kidney disease: a protocol for developing and testing a complex intervention.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- Peritoneal dialysis after shared decision-making: the disparity between reality and patient expectations.BMC nursing · 2022Article
- Article
- Associations among political voting preference, high-risk health status, and preventative behaviors for COVID-19.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Shared Decision-Making for a Dialysis Modality.Kidney international reports · 2022Review
- Time on Therapy of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis with and without Remote Patient Monitoring: A Cohort Study.International journal of nephrology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with kidney failure experience a complex decision on dialysis modality performed either at home or in hospital. The options have different levels of impact on their physical and psychological condition and social life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an intervention designed to achieve shared decision-making for dialysis choice. Specific objectives were: 1) to measure decision quality as indicated by patients' knowledge, readiness and achieved preferences; and 2) to determine if patients experienced shared decision-making.
methodA mixed methods descriptive study was conducted using both questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Eligible participants were adults with kidney failure considering dialysis modality. The intervention, based on the Three-Talk model, consisted of a patient decision aid and decision coaching meetings provided by trained dialysis coordinators. The intervention was delivered to 349 patients as part of their clinical pathway of care. After the intervention, 148 participants completed the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and the Decision Quality Measurement, and 29 participants were interviewed. Concordance between knowledge, decision and preference was calculated to measure decision quality. Interview transcripts were analysed qualitatively.
resultsThe participants obtained a mean score for shared decision-making of 86 out of 100. There was no significant difference between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (97 versus 83; p = 0.627). The participants obtained a knowledge score of 82% and a readiness score of 86%. Those choosing home-based treatment had higher knowledge score than those choosing hospital-based treatment (84% versus 75%; p = 0.006) but no significant difference on the readiness score (87% versus 84%; p = 0.908). Considering the chosen option and the knowledge score, 83% of the participants achieved a high-quality decision. No significant difference was found for decision quality between those choosing home- or hospital-based treatment (83% versus 83%; p = 0.935). Interview data informed the interpretation of these results.
conclusionsAlthough there was no control group, over 80% of participants exposed to the intervention and responded to the surveys experienced shared decision-making and reached a high-quality decision. Both participants who chose home- and hospital-based treatment experienced the intervention as shared decision-making and made a high-quality decision. Qualitative findings supported the quantitative results.
trial registrationThe full trial protocol is available at ClinicalTrials. Gov ( NCT03868800 ). The study has been registered retrospectively.
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.