Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38290171›Full record

ArticlePatient education and counseling2024

Patients' and physicians' beliefs and attitudes towards integrating personalized risk estimates into patient education about left ventricular assist device therapy.

Kristin M Kostick-Quenet, Benjamin Lang, Natalie Dorfman, Jerry Estep, Mandeep R Mehra, Arvind Bhimaraj, Andrew Civitello, Ulrich Jorde, Barry Trachtenberg, Nir Uriel and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient education and counseling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Kristin M Kostick-QuenetCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: kristin.kostick@bcm.edu.
Benjamin LangCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Natalie DorfmanCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Jerry EstepCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Mandeep R MehraBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Arvind BhimarajHouston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Andrew CivitelloBaylor St. Luke's Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Ulrich JordeMontefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
Barry TrachtenbergHouston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Nir UrielColumbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Holland KaplanCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Eleanor Gilmore-SzottCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Robert VolkUniversity of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Mahwash KassiHouston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
J S Blumenthal-BarbyCenter for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Baylor College of Medicine · USMethodist Hospital · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCleveland Clinic · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USMontefiore Medical Center · USSt. Luke's Hospital · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

A multi-site trial to test benefits of adding a personalized risk calculator to an online decision aid for left ventricular assist deviceR01HS027784 · AHRQ · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI BLUMENTHAL-BARBY, JENNIFER · 2020 to 2024
$2.0M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS027784
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonalized risk (PR) estimates may enhance clinical decision making and risk communication by providing individualized estimates of patient outcomes. We explored stakeholder attitudes toward the utility, acceptability, usefulness and best-practices for integrating PR estimates into patient education and decision making about Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD). METHODS AND

resultsAs part of a 5-year multi-institutional AHRQ project, we conducted 40 interviews with stakeholders (physicians, nurse coordinators, patients, and caregivers), analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. All stakeholder groups voiced positive views towards integrating PR in decision making. Patients, caregivers and coordinators emphasized that PR can help to better understand a patient's condition and risks, prepare mentally and logistically for likely outcomes, and meaningfully engage in decision making. Physicians felt it can improve their decision making by enhancing insight into outcomes, enhance tailored pre-emptive care, increase confidence in decisions, and reduce bias and subjectivity. All stakeholder groups also raised concerns about accuracy, representativeness and relevance of algorithms; predictive uncertainty; utility in relation to physician's expertise; potential negative reactions among patients; and overreliance.

conclusionStakeholders are optimistic about integrating PR into clinical decision making, but acceptability depends on prospectively demonstrating accuracy, relevance and evidence that benefits of PR outweigh potential negative impacts on decision making quality.

Indexed as

Heart-Assist DevicesPhysiciansAttitudeDecision MakingHumansPatient Education as TopicClinical decision makingPatient engagementPersonalized risk estimatesShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID38290171
PMCPMC12143230
OpenAlexW4391152011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.