Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37403779›Full record

Trial reportMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2023

Randomized Trial of the Choosing Wisely Consumer Questions and a Shared Decision-Making Video Intervention on Decision-Making Outcomes.

Danielle Marie Muscat, Rachel Thompson, Erin Cvejic, Jenna Smith, Edward Hoi-Fan Chang, Marguerite Tracy, Joshua Zadro, Robyn Lindner, Kirsten J McCaffery

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Communication Processes Related to Decision-Making in Medication Management Between Healthcare Providers, Older People and Their Carers: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Danielle Marie MuscatFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachel ThompsonFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1009-0746
Erin CvejicFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jenna SmithFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0480-8125
Edward Hoi-Fan ChangFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Marguerite TracyFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1247-6412
Joshua ZadroFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8981-2125
Robyn LindnerNPS Medicinewise, New South Wales, Australia.
Kirsten J McCafferyFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite widespread use, there are few studies evaluating the consumer Choosing Wisely questions.

methodsWe evaluated the impact of the Choosing Wisely questions on consumers' decision-making outcomes. Adults living in Australia were presented with a hypothetical low-value care scenario. Using a 2×2×2 between-subjects factorial design, they were randomized to either the Choosing Wisely questions ("Questions"), a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video ("Video"), both interventions, or control (no intervention). Primary outcomes were 1) self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making and 2) intention to engage in SDM.

resultsA total of 1,439 participants (45.6% with "inadequate" health literacy) were eligible and included in the analysis. Intention to engage in SDM was higher in people randomized to the Video (mean difference [MD] = 0.24 [scale 0-6], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14, 0.35), Questions (MD = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.22), and both interventions (MD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23-0.44,

conclusionsThe Choosing Wisely questions and a video to promote SDM may improve intention to engage in SDM and support patients in identifying questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign (with some additional benefits of the video intervention).

trial registrationANZCTR376477. HIGHLIGHTS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial online with adults living in Australia to test the effectiveness of the consumer Choosing Wisely questions and a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video.Both interventions improved intention to engage in SDM and supported participants to identify questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign.There were some additional benefits of the Video intervention in reducing willingness to accept low-value treatment for low-back pain without asking questions; however, neither intervention changed participants' self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making nor affected perceptions of preparedness to engage in SDM or knowledge of rights to be involved in health care decision-making.The simple, low-cost nature of the interventions may make them appropriate for implementation within a suite of approaches to address low-value care at a population level.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedHealth LiteracyAdultAustraliaDecision MakingHumansIntentionPatient Participationdecision makinghealth literacylow-value carepatient participationquestion prompt list, medical overuseshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID37403779
PMCPMC10422858
OpenAlexW4383186504

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.