Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39707817›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2025

Physician-Patient Communication about Novel Drugs and High-Risk Medical Devices.

Sanket S Dhruva, Aaron S Kesselheim, Steven Woloshin, Robin Z Ji, Zhigang Lu, Jonathan J Darrow, Rita F Redberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2025. 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. 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

7 authors.

Sanket S DhruvaUniversity of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0674-2032
Aaron S KesselheimProgram On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Steven WoloshinDartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Robin Z JiUniversity of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Zhigang LuProgram On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Jonathan J DarrowProgram On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7351-4243
Rita F RedbergUniversity of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAfter a new drug or medical device is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), physician-patient communication about benefits and risks is critical, including whether the product was approved through an expedited pathway based on limited evidence. In addition, physician reporting of drug- and device-related adverse events in real-world use is necessary to have a complete safety profile. We studied physician-reported communication and safety-reporting practices related to drugs and devices.

methodsWe surveyed a random national sample of American Board of Internal Medicine-certified internists, cardiologists, and oncologists between October 2021 and September 2022 about the sources of information used to prescribe a drug or medical device, details of communication with patients, and reporting of adverse events.

resultsAmong 509 respondents (39% response rate), 387 (76%) reported that FDA approval influenced their decision "a lot" to prescribe a new drug or recommend use of a medical device. Half (122; 50%) of the 244 physicians randomized to receive a question about their own communication of trial endpoints reported "usually" telling patients when products were approved based on surrogate measures and 126 (52%) "usually" reported telling patients if a postapproval trial was required to evaluate safety and effectiveness. Two-thirds (165) said they were likely to report drug- or device-related adverse events to FDA.

conclusionsPhysician self-reporting of communication with patients about drugs and devices suggests that half include characteristics of the pivotal trials such as use of clinically meaningful endpoints or continued requirement for evidence generation. IMPLICATIONS: More consistent discussions with patients about the quality of evidence supporting new drugs and devices and increased reporting of adverse events could ensure optimal use of these products in clinical practice. HIGHLIGHTS: Among 509 board-certified internists, cardiologists, and oncologists, half reported telling patients when drugs or medical devices were approved based on surrogate measures and when there was an FDA-mandated postapproval trial to further evaluate safety and effectiveness.As drugs and medical devices are increasingly approved by the FDA through expedited pathways based on data with lingering uncertainties, discussion with patients about issues such as the nature of the endpoints assessed and existence of postapproval testing requirements can help inform patient decision making.

Indexed as

CommunicationEquipment and SuppliesPhysician-Patient RelationsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administrationadverse eventsdrugsfood & drug administrationmedical devicesphysician-patient communication

Identifiers

PMID39707817
PMCPMC11736971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.