ArticleHealth science reports2023
Patient values and preferences regarding communicating risk versus benefit of benzodiazepine initiation: A cross-sectional survey study.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 'I haven't discussed anything with anyone': lived experience of long-term users of benzodiazepine receptor agonists regarding their treatment for substance use disorder.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2024Article
- Patient values and preferences regarding communicating risk versus benefit of benzodiazepine initiation: A cross-sectional survey study.Health science reports · 2023Article
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
Background and Aims: Communicating information about the risks and benefits of benzodiazepines so that it is meaningful to the patient has not been previously described. This study aims to determine patient preferences regarding information received before initiating a benzodiazepine. Methods: An online survey was distributed through social media and advertisements to Canadians ≥18 years old over a 6-month period (May-Oct 2022) to collect participant's rating of importance of statements and factors about the risk and benefits of benzodiazepines before initiating treatment using a 10-point Likert-type scale. Treatment preferences based on efficacy and risk information were also elicited. The survey was developed and pilot-tested in collaboration with an advisory committee of individuals with lived and living experience with benzodiazepine use. Results: Thirty-seven participants responded to the survey (mean age 30 years old, 81.1% identified as female). The majority of respondents had a history of anxiety (83.8%) or insomnia (32.4%), and 10 (27.0%) respondents had used a benzodiazepine. Patient counseling related to withdrawal symptoms of benzodiazepines, risk of harm in combination with other sedating agents, risk of physical and psychological dependence, and risk of effects on cognition were rated high in the importance of receiving this information before starting a benzodiazepine relative to efficacy endpoints, such as improvement in sleep parameters. When provided with information about the chance of efficacy and risk of harm, 100% would have selected cognitive behavioral therapy as the best treatment option. The most frequently reported source of medication information where patients have sought information was from the internet (25.0%), followed by doctors (21.9%) and pharmacists (18.8%). Conclusions: This study identified patient important factors and statements viewed as important to communicate before initiating a benzodiazepine. The findings of this survey study will help inform decision-making when considering treatment options for managing anxiety or insomnia.
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.