Trial reportMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2022
Fostering Patient Choice Awareness and Presenting Treatment Options Neutrally: A Randomized Trial to Assess the Effect on Perceived Room for Involvement in Decision Making.
Trial report in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physician Emotion and Self-disclosure in Serious Illness Conversations: Impact on Trust, Compassion, Professionalism and Comfort.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Perspectives on shared decision making related to medications from patients with multiple long-term conditions transitioning from hospital to home: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Beyond Lip Service: A Position Paper to Truly Stimulate Shared Decision-Making.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- "Talk About It!" Shared Decision-Making for Methadone and Buprenorphine Initiation: Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Conversation Aid via Community-Based Participatory Research.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of Changes in Canine Thyroid Cancer Terminology on Caregiver Anxiety Levels and Treatment Preferences in a Scenario-Based Study.Veterinary and comparative oncology · 2025Article
- Comforting styles of serious illness conversations: a Swiss wide factorial survey study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Conceptualizing and Measuring Trust, Mistrust, and Distrust: Implications for Advancing Health Equity and Building Trustworthiness.Annual review of public health · 2024Review
- Shared decision-making as a method of care.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- Characterizing How Pediatric Clinicians Create Choice Awareness When Performing Shared Decision-Making.Academic pediatricsObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeShared decision making calls for clinician communication strategies that aim to foster choice awareness and to present treatment options neutrally, such as by not showing a preference. Evidence for the effectiveness of these communication strategies to enhance patient involvement in treatment decision making is lacking. We tested the effects of 2 strategies in an online randomized video-vignettes experiment.
methodsWe developed disease-specific video vignettes for rheumatic disease, cancer, and kidney disease showcasing a physician presenting 2 treatment options. We tested the strategies in a 2 (choice awareness communication present/absent) by 2 (physician preference communication present/absent) randomized between-subjects design. We asked patients and disease-naïve participants to view 1 video vignette while imagining being the patient and to report perceived room for involvement (primary outcome), understanding of treatment information, treatment preference, satisfaction with the consultation, and trust in the physician (secondary outcomes). Differences across experimental conditions were assessed using 2-way analyses of variance.
resultsA total of 324 patients and 360 disease-naïve respondents participated (mean age, 52 ± 14.7 y, 54% female, 56% lower educated, mean health literacy, 12 ± 2.1 on a 3-15 scale). The results showed that choice awareness communication had a positive (M
conclusionsThis is the first experimental evidence for a small effect of fostering choice awareness and no effect of physician preference on perceived room to participate in decision making. Physician preference steered patients toward preferring that option.
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.