Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36917146›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2023

Effectiveness of Interactive Digital Decision Aids in Prenatal Screening Decision-making: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Hong Yat Conrad Wong, Saba Asim, Qi Feng, Sherry Xiao-Hong Fu, Daljit Singh Sahota, Po Lam So, Dong Dong

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Hong Yat Conrad WongThe Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-0048-1206
Saba AsimThe Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-6538-0321
Qi FengNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9323-9421
Sherry Xiao-Hong FuThe Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-3594-2367
Daljit Singh SahotaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0002-3755-2701
Po Lam SoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tuen Mun Hospital, Tuen Mun, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-3536-7462
Dong DongThe Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-9784-6472

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing prenatal screening options and limited consultation time have made it difficult for pregnant women to participate in shared decision-making. Interactive digital decision aids (IDDAs) could integrate interactive technology into health care to a facilitate higher-quality decision-making process.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of IDDAs on pregnant women's decision-making regarding prenatal screening.

methodsWe searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Google Scholar, and reference lists of included studies until August 2021. We included the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of IDDAs (fulfilling basic criteria of International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration and these were interactive and digital) as an adjunct to standard care with standard care alone and involved pregnant women themselves in prenatal screening decision-making. Data on primary outcomes, that is, knowledge and decisional conflict, and secondary outcomes were extracted, and meta-analyses were conducted based on standardized mean differences (SMDs). Subgroup analysis based on knowledge was performed. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment.

resultsEight RCTs were identified from 10,283 references, of which 7 were included in quantitative synthesis. Analyses showed that IDDAs increased knowledge (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.26-0.90) and decreased decisional conflict (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05). Substantial heterogeneity in knowledge was identified, which could not be completely resolved through subgroup analysis.

conclusionsIDDAs can improve certain aspects of decision-making in prenatal screening among pregnant women, but the results require cautious interpretation.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesPrenatal DiagnosisFemaleHumansPatient ParticipationPregnancyinformed decision-makinginteractive digital decision aidspregnancyprenatal screeningsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36917146
PMCPMC10131906

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.