Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38863945›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024

Decisional Conflict Regarding Disease-Modifying Treatment Choices Among Patients with Mid-Stage Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

Julia Sabin, Elisa Salas, Jesús Martín-Martínez, Antonio Candeliere-Merlicco, Francisco Javier Barrero Hernández, Ana María Alonso Torres, José Luis Sánchez-Menoyo, Laura Borrega, María Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Montserrat Gómez-Gutiérrez and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Observational
  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

21 authors.

Julia SabinDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Madrid, Spain.
Elisa SalasMedical Department, Roche Farma, Madrid, Spain.
Jesús Martín-MartínezDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain.
Antonio Candeliere-MerliccoDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Rafael Méndez, Lorca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9978-0198
Francisco Javier Barrero HernándezDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Ana María Alonso TorresDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Málaga, Spain.
José Luis Sánchez-MenoyoDepartment of Neurology, Hospital de Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao, Spain.
Laura BorregaDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, Alcorcón, Spain.
María Rodríguez-RodríguezDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Lucus Augusti, Lugo, Spain.
Montserrat Gómez-GutiérrezDepartment of Neurology, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8587-8303
Sara EichauDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Spain.
Miguel Ángel Hernández-PérezDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de Candelaria, Tenerife, Spain.
Carmen CallesDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Eva Fernandez-DiazDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario de Albacete, Albacete, Spain.
Olga CarmonaDepartment of Neurology, Fundació Salut Empordà, Figueres, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5957-0046
Aida OrvizDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1359-0903
Ana López-RealDepartment of Neurology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain.
Pablo López-MuñozDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Llíria, Spain.
Amelia Mendoza RodríguezDepartment of Neurology, Complejo Asistencial de Segovia, Segovia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8732-8409
Eduardo Aguera-MoralesDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain.
Jorge MaurinoMedical Department, Roche Farma, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9858-3555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Shared decision-making is critical in multiple sclerosis (MS) due to the uncertainty of the disease trajectory over time and the large number of treatment options with differing efficacy, safety and administration characteristics. The aim of this study was to assess patients' decisional conflict regarding the choice of a disease-modifying therapy and its associated factors in patients with mid-stage relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Methods: A multicenter, non-interventional study was conducted. Adult patients with a diagnosis of RRMS (2017 revised McDonald criteria) and disease duration of 3 to 8 years were included. The level of uncertainty experienced by a patient when faced with making a treatment choice was assessed using the 4-item Decisional Conflict Scale. A battery of patient-reported and clinician-rated measures was administered to obtain information on symptom severity, illness perception, illness-related uncertainty, regret, MS knowledge, risk taking behavior, preferred role in the decision-making process, cognition, and self-management. Patients were recruited during routine follow-up visits and completed all questionnaires online using electronic tablets at the hospital. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 201 patients were studied. Mean age (Standard deviation) was 38.7 (8.4) years and 74.1% were female. Median disease duration (Interquartile range) was 6.0 (4.0-7.0) years. Median EDSS score was 1.0 (0-2.0). Sixty-seven (33.3%) patients reported a decisional conflict. These patients had lower MS knowledge and more illness uncertainty, anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, subjective symptom severity, a threatening illness perception, and poorer quality of life than their counterparts. Lack of decisional conflict was associated with MS knowledge (Odds ratio [OR]=1.195, 95% CI 1.045, 1.383, p=0.013), self-management (OR=1.049, 95% CI 1.013, 1.093, p=0.018), and regret after a healthcare decision (OR=0.860, 95% CI 0.756, 0.973, p=0.018) in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Decisional conflict regarding the selection of a disease-modifying therapy was a common phenomenon in patients with mid-stage RRMS. Identifying factors associated with decisional conflict may be useful to implement preventive strategies that help patients better understand their condition and strengthen their self-management resources.

Indexed as

decisional conflictdecision-makingdisease-modifying therapiesdisease-related knowledgemultiple sclerosisself-management

Identifiers

PMID38863945
PMCPMC11166147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.