Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32799397›Full record

Trial reportArthritis care & research2022

Enhancing Patient Understanding of Medication Risks and Benefits.

Susan J Blalock, Elizabeth B Solow, Valerie F Reyna, Molly Keebler, Delesha Carpenter, Caprice Hunt, Genevieve Hickey, Jeffrey R Curtis, Kimberlee O'Neill, Sandra Bond Chapman

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Arthritis care & research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Susan J BlalockEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.ORCID 0000-0002-8750-3385
Elizabeth B SolowUniversity of Texas Southwestern, Dallas.
Valerie F ReynaCornell University, Ithaca, New York.
Molly KeeblerUniversity of Texas at Dallas.
Delesha CarpenterEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Caprice HuntEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Genevieve HickeyEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Jeffrey R CurtisUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham.ORCID 0000-0002-8907-8976
Kimberlee O'NeillEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Sandra Bond ChapmanUniversity of Texas at Dallas.

Funding

PI PCS-1409-24099
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of 2 interventions, including the DrugFactsBox format for presenting written medication information and the SMART (Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Training) program designed to enhance gist (i.e., "bottom-line" meaning) reasoning ability.

methodsWe used a 2 × 2 factorial research design. A total of 286 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups, including DrugFactsBox with the SMART program, DrugFactsBox without the SMART program, other consumer medication information (CMI) with the SMART program, and other CMI without the SMART program. Data were collected via telephone interviews and online questionnaires at 4 time points, including baseline and 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month time points following baseline. The primary outcome variable was informed decision-making, which was defined as making a value-consistent decision concerning use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs based on adequate knowledge.

resultsWe found no main effects for the 2 interventions, either alone or in combination. However, there was a significant interaction between assignment to the SMART/no SMART groups and informed decision-making at baseline. Among participants in the SMART groups who did not meet the criteria for informed decision-making at baseline, 42.5% met the criteria at the 6-month follow-up, compared to 23.6% of participants in the no SMART groups (mean difference 18.9 [95% confidence interval 5.6, 32.2]; P = 0.007). This difference was driven by increased knowledge in the SMART groups. Among participants who met the criteria for informed decision-making at baseline, the difference between the SMART and no SMART groups was not statistically significant.

conclusionParticipation in a theory-driven program to enhance gist reasoning may have a beneficial effect on informed decision-making among patients with inadequate knowledge concerning therapeutic options.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedArthritis, RheumatoidDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicAntirheumatic Agents

Identifiers

PMID32799397
PMCPMC9305434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.