Trial reportJAMA surgery2022
Surgeon Use of Shared Decision-making for Older Adults Considering Major Surgery: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02623335 (Navigating High Risk Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 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.
Navigating High Risk Surgery: Empowering Older Adults to Ask Questions That Inform Decisions About Surgical Treatment
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Real-Time Support Role of Augmented Reality Technology in Shared Decision-Making in Neurosurgery Under the SEGUE Framework: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Observational
- Operationalising 'what matters'-will we ever find a way to patient-centred care?BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Reliability of a rating rubric to assess quality of preoperative goals of care notes.American journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Elective Lumbar Decompression With Fusion Is Associated With Increased Mortality Compared With Decompression Alone: A National Propensity-Matched Analysis of Aging Cohorts.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- "It's Either Have Surgery or Die": How Patients Perceive the Choice to Undergo High-Risk Abdominal Surgery for Cancer.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of lobectomy versus isthmusectomy for clinically node-negative solitary isthmic papillary thyroid microcarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Values elicitation among surgical oncologists: Findings from an international survey.European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2026Article
- Predictive validity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease phenotypes in inpatient elective surgery: a population-based study.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- The Surgical Pause: The Importance of Measuring Frailty and Taking Action to Address Identified Frailty.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2025Article
- Better Conversations for Better Informed Consent: Talking with Surgical Patients.The Hastings Center report · 2024Article
- An acute care surgeon's dilemma: Operative vs. non-operative management of emergency general surgery conditions in patients with recent colorectal cancer treatment.American journal of surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Description of the Content and Quality of Publicly Available Information on the Internet About Inhaled Volatile Anesthesia and Total Intravenous Anesthesia: Descriptive Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2023Article
- Many patients fail to achieve MCID for PROMIS upper extremity and pain interference following nonoperative management of rotator cuff tears.JSES international · 2023Article
- Informed Consent and Shared Decision Making in the Perioperative Environment.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2023Review
- Physician-reported characteristics, representations, and ethical justifications of shared decision-making practices in the care of paediatric patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Factors Associated With Provision of Nonbeneficial Surgery: A National Survey of Surgeons.Annals of surgery · 2023Article
- Pitfalls and Traps in the Surgical Evaluation of Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS).Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Because major surgery carries significant risks for older adults with comorbid conditions, shared decision-making is recommended to ensure patients receive care consistent with their goals. However, it is unknown how often shared decision-making is used for these patients. Objective: To describe the use of shared decision-making during discussions about major surgery with older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a secondary analysis of conversations audio recorded during a randomized clinical trial of a question prompt list. Data were collected from June 1, 2016, to November 31, 2018, from 43 surgeons and 446 patients 60 years or older with at least 1 comorbidity at outpatient surgical clinics at 5 academic centers. Interventions: Patients received a question prompt list brochure that contained questions they could ask a surgeon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 5-domain Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-making (OPTION5) score (range, 0-100, with higher scores indicating greater shared decision-making) was used to measure shared decision-making. Results: A total of 378 surgical consultations were analyzed (mean [SD] patient age, 71.9 [7.2] years; 206 [55%] male; 312 [83%] White). The mean (SD) OPTION5 score was 34.7 (20.6) and was not affected by the intervention. The mean (SD) score in the group receiving the question prompt list was 36.7 (21.2); in the control group, the mean (SD) score was 32.9 (19.9) (effect estimate, 3.80; 95% CI, -0.30 to 8.00; P = .07). Individual surgeon use of shared decision-making varied greatly, with a lowest median score of 10 (IQR, 10-20) to a high of 65 (IQR, 55-80). Lower-performing surgeons had little variation in OPTION5 scores, whereas high-performing surgeons had wide variation. Use of shared decision-making increased when surgeons appeared reluctant to operate (effect estimate, 7.40; 95% CI, 2.60-12.20; P = .003). Although longer conversations were associated with slightly higher OPTION5 scores (effect estimate, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88; P < .001), 57% of high-scoring transcripts were 26 minutes long or less. On multivariable analysis, patient age and gender, patient education, surgeon age, and surgeon gender were not significantly associated with OPTION5 scores. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that although shared decision-making is important to support the preferences of older adults considering major surgery, surgeon use of shared decision-making is highly variable. Skillful shared decision-making can be done in less than 30 minutes; however, surgeons who engage in high-scoring shared decision-making are more likely to do so when surgical intervention is less obviously beneficial for the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02623335.
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.