ArticleApplied clinical informatics2024
"It Attracts Your Eyes and Brain": Refining Visualizations for Shared Decision-Making with Heart Failure Patients.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundN-of-1 trials have emerged as a personalized approach to patient-centered care, where patients can compare evidence-based treatments using their own data. However, little is known about optimal methods to present individual-level data from medication-related N-of-1 trials to patients to promote decision-making.
objectivesWe conducted qualitative interviews with patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction undergoing N-of-1 trials to iterate, refine, and optimize a patient-facing data visualization tool for displaying the results of N-of-1 medication trials. The goal of optimizing this tool was to promote patients' understanding of their individual health information and to ultimately facilitate shared decision-making about continuing or discontinuing their medication.
methodsWe conducted 32 semistructured qualitative interviews with 9 participants over the course of their participation in N-of-1 trials. The N-of-1 trials were conducted to facilitate a comparison of continuing versus discontinuing a β-blocker. Interviews were conducted in person or over the phone after each treatment period to evaluate participant perspectives on a data visualization tool prototype. Data were coded using directed content analysis by two independent reviewers and included a third reviewer to reach a consensus when needed. Major themes were extracted and iteratively incorporated into the patient-facing data visualization tool.
resultsNine participants provided feedback on how their data were displayed in the visualization tool. After qualitative analysis, three major themes emerged that informed our final interface. Participants preferred: (1) clearly stated individual symptom scores, (2) a reference image with labels to guide their interpretation of symptom information, and (3) qualitative language over numbers alone conveying the meaning of changes in their scores (e.g., better, worse).
conclusionFeedback informed the design of a patient-facing data visualization tool for medication-related N-of-1 trials. Future work should include usability and comprehension testing of this interface on a larger scale.
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.