Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33356574›Full record

ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2022

Psychosocial Factors Are Associated With Risk Acceptance in Upper Extremity Patients.

Amirreza Fatehi, David Ring, Lee M Reichel, Gregg A Vagner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Amirreza FatehiThe University of Texas at Austin, USA.
David RingThe University of Texas at Austin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2910-5071
Lee M ReichelThe University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Gregg A VagnerThe University of Texas at Austin, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients who help choose their health strategies are more adherent and achieve better health. An important role of the clinician is to verify that a patient's expressed preferences are consistent with what matters most to the patient and not muddled by common misconceptions about symptoms or conditions. Patient choices are influenced by estimation of the potential benefits and potential harms of a given intervention. One method for quantifying these estimations is the concept of maximum acceptable risk (MAR), or the maximum risk that subjects are willing to accept in exchange for a given therapeutic benefit. This study addressed the hypothesis that misconceptions due to unhelpful cognitive bias regarding pain are associated with risk acceptance among people seeking care for an upper extremity condition.

methodsWe invited 140 new adult patients visiting an upper extremity specialist to complete a survey including demographics, pain intensity, depression and anxiety symptoms, catastrophic thinking, activity limitations, and MAR. Trauma or nontrauma diagnosis was obtained from the treating clinician and recorded by the research assistant. We used bivariate and linear regression analyses to identify factors associated with MAR among this population.

resultsAccounting for potential confounding in multivariable analysis, higher MAR was associated with older age and greater catastrophic thinking.

conclusionsSpecialists can be aware that people with more unhelpful cognitive biases may be willing to take more risk. Vigilance for common misconceptions and gentle, incremental reorientation of those misconceptions can increase the probability that people will choose options consistent with what matters most to them.

Indexed as

AnxietyUpper ExtremityAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPainPain Measurementdecision-makingmaximum acceptable riskorthopedicspsychologicalrisk acceptanceupper extremity

Identifiers

PMID33356574
PMCPMC9465787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.