ArticlePEC innovation2023
Co-designing and piloting educational materials with patients and healthcare providers for syncope in the emergency department.
Article in PEC innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating Co-Designed vs Researcher-Driven Personalized Feedback Formats in a Brief Digital Alcohol Use Intervention: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and design interventions to promote adherence to 2017 Guideline for Syncope Evaluation and Management. Methods: Focus groups and interviews were conducted to understand preferences, needs and barriers from patients and providers. Educational materials for patients were developed following a co-design, iterative process with patients, providers and hospital staff. The academic medical center's (AMC) Patient Education Department and Patient & Family Advisory Council reviewed materials to ensure health literacy. We piloted usability and feasibility of delivering the materials to a small cohort of patients. Results: From Feb to March 2020, 24 patients were asked to watch the video. Twenty-two watched the intake video; of those 8 watched the discharge video. 95% of participants found the intake video informational and 86% would recommend it to others; 100% found the discharge video informational and would recommend it to others. Patients who watched both videos reported the videos improved their overall stay. Conclusion: Our study described a patient-clinician-researcher codesign process and demonstrated feasibility of tools developed to communicate risk and uncertainty with patients and facilitate shared decision making in syncope evaluation. Innovation: Engaging end users in developing interventions is critical for sustained practice change.
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.