Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33753445›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Decision Analysis in SHared decision making for Thromboprophylaxis during Pregnancy (DASH-TOP): a sequential explanatory mixed methods pilot study protocol.

Brittany Humphries, Montserrat León-García, Shannon Bates, Gordon Guyatt, Mark Eckman, Rohan D'Souza, Nadine Shehata, Susan Jack, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Feng Xie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Brittany HumphriesDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Montserrat León-GarcíaIberoamerican Cochrane Center, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain.
Shannon BatesDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Gordon GuyattDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Mark EckmanDivision of General Internal Medicine and Center for Clinical Effectiveness, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Rohan D'SouzaDivision of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nadine ShehataDepartments of Medicine, Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Division of Hematology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Susan JackDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Pablo Alonso-CoelloIberoamerican Cochrane Center, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain fengxie@mcmaster.ca palonso@santpau.cat.
Feng XieDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada fengxie@mcmaster.ca palonso@santpau.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3454-6266
Impact · CAMount Sinai Hospital · CAIberoamerican Cochrane Centre · ESMcMaster University · CAUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Cincinnati · US

Funding

Canadian Institutes for Health Research GSD – 152327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDecision analysis is a quantitative approach to decision making that could bridge the gap between decisions based solely on evidence and the unique values and preferences of individual patients, a feature especially important when existing evidence cannot support clear recommendations and there is a close balance between harms and benefits for the treatments options under consideration. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during pregnancy represents one such situation. The objective of this paper is to describe the rationale and methodology of a pilot study that will explore the application of decision analysis to a shared decision-making process involving prophylactic LMWH for pregnant women or those considering pregnancy who have experienced a VTE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct an international, mixed methods, explanatory, sequential study, including quantitative data collection and analysis followed by qualitative data collection and analysis. In step I, we will ask women who are pregnant or considering pregnancy and have experienced VTE to participate in a shared decision-making intervention for prophylactic LMWH. The intervention consists of three components: a direct choice exercise, a values elicitation exercise and a personalised decision analysis. After administration of the intervention, we will ask women to make a treatment decision and measure decisional conflict, self-efficacy and satisfaction. In step II, which follows the analysis of quantitative data, we will use the results to inform the qualitative interview. Step III will be a qualitative descriptive study that explores participants' experiences and perceptions of the intervention. In step IV, we will integrate findings from the qualitative and quantitative analyses to obtain meta-inferences. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Site-specific ethics boards have approved the study. All participants will provide informed consent. The research team will take an integrated approach to knowledge translation.

Indexed as

Heparin, Low-Molecular-WeightVenous ThromboembolismAnticoagulantsDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansPilot ProjectsPregnancyAnticoagulantsHeparin, Low-Molecular-Weighthaematologyhealth economicsmaternal medicinethromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID33753445
PMCPMC7986891
OpenAlexW3136132250

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.