Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33933057›Full record

ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2021

Exploring physicians and patients' perspectives for current interventions on thyroid nodules using a MCDA method.

Linda Karrer, Shixuan Zhang, Thomas Kühlein, Peter L Kolominsky-Rabas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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
–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

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

  1. Ablative Technologies for Thyroid Nodules: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  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

4 authors.

Linda Karrer *Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Public Health (IZPH), Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlange, Bavaria, Germany.
Shixuan Zhang *Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Public Health (IZPH), Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlange, Bavaria, Germany. Shixuan.Zhang@fau.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8427-4943
Thomas KühleinInstitute of General Practice, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany.
Peter L Kolominsky-RabasInterdisciplinary Centre for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Public Health (IZPH), Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlange, Bavaria, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe detection of thyroid cancer has rapidly increased over last few decades without an increase in disease specific mortality. Several studies claim that the diagnose of thyroid nodules through routine ultrasound imaging is often the trigger for cascade effects leading to unnecessary follow-up over many years or to invasive treatment. The objective of this study was to explore physicians' and patients' insights and preferences regarding the current interventions on thyroid nodules.

methodsAn online survey was developed using a comprehensive multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework, the EVIdence based Decision-Making (EVIDEM). The EVIDEM core model used in this study encompassed 13 quantitative criteria and four qualitative criteria. Participants were asked to provide weights referring to what matters most important in general for each criterion, performance scores for appraising the interventions on thyroid nodules and their consideration of impact of contextual criteria. Normalized weights and standardized scores were combined to calculate a value contribution across all participants, additionally differences across physicians and patients' group were explored.

results48 patients and 31 physicians were included in the analysis. The value estimate of the interventions on thyroid nodules reached 0.549 for patients' group and 0.5 was reported by the physicians' group, compared to 0.543 for all participants. The highest value contributor was 'Comparative effectiveness' (0.073 ± 0.020). For the physicians' group, 'Comparative safety' (0.050 ± 0.023) was given with higher value. And for the patients' group, 'Type of preventive benefits' (0.059 ± 0.022) contributed more positively to the value estimation. 51% participants considered 'Population priorities and access' having a negative impact on the interventions of nodules.66% participants thought that the 'system capacity' had a negative impact.

conclusionOur study shows participants' preferences on each criterion, i.e., physician indicated keeping the interventions safe and effective more important, patients indicated quality of life after receiving interventions more important. Through comparison among participants, differences have been highlighted, which can make better communication between physicians and patients. This study provides a supportive decision-making for healthcare providers when they explored the interventions on thyroid nodules.

Indexed as

Adverse Cascade EffectsEVIDEMHealth Technology Assessment (HTA)MCDAMulti criteria decision AnalysisOverdiagnosisThyroid nodules

Identifiers

PMID33933057
PMCPMC8088554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.