Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38347862›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2024

Embedding an Education Intervention about Shared Decision Making into an RCT: Ensuring competency and fidelity.

Amy B Zelenski, Karlie Haug, Kyle J Bushaw, Anne Buffington, Taylor Bradley, Kristine L Kwekkeboom, Lily Stalter, Bret M Hanlon, Maureen J Wakeen, Roy A Jhagroo and 4 more

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

Article in PEC innovation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy B ZelenskiDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Karlie HaugDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Kyle J BushawDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Anne BuffingtonDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Taylor BradleyDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Kristine L KwekkeboomSchool of Nursing, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Lily StalterDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Bret M HanlonDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Maureen J WakeenDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Roy A JhagrooDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Laura J MaursetterDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Sara K JohnsonDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Toby C CampbellDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Margaret L SchwarzeDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Best Case/Worst Case: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial of Scenario Planning for Patients with End-Stage Kidney DiseaseR01AG065365 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SCHWARZE, MARGARET · 2020 to 2024
$3.0M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG065365
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To describe the outcomes of training nephrology clinicians and clinical research participants, to use the Best Case/Worst Case Communication intervention, for discussions about dialysis initiation for patients with life-limiting illness, during a randomized clinical trial to ensure competency, fidelity to the intervention, and adherence to study protocols and the intervention throughout the trial. Methods: We enrolled 68 nephrologists at ten study sites and randomized them to receive training or wait-list control. We collected copies of completed graphic aids (component of the intervention), used with study-enrolled patients, to measure fidelity and adherence. Results: We trained 34 of 36 nephrologists to competence and 27 completed the entire program. We received 60 graphic aids for study-enrolled patients for a 73% return rate in the intervention arm. The intervention fidelity score for the graphic aid reflected completion of all elements throughout the study. Conclusion: We successfully taught the Best Case/Worst Case Communication intervention to clinicians as research participants within a randomized clinical trial. Innovation: Decisions about dialysis are an opportunity to discuss prognosis and uncertainty in relation to consideration of prolonged life supporting therapy. Our study reveals a strategy to evaluate adherence to a communication intervention in real time during a clinical study.

Indexed as

Communication educationKidney diseaseShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID38347862
PMCPMC10859294
OpenAlexW4391482761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.