Trial reportClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2025
Piloting of a Decision Aid for Recurrent Tonsillitis.
Trial report in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCurrently, there is no adult-specific decision aid (DA) to support decision-making regarding recurrent tonsillitis. This study intends to address this gap by piloting a prototype DA.
designRandomised clinical trial.
settingSingle centre trial at a tertiary otolaryngology department.
participantsForty-three patients were randomised to either the DA or Treatment as Usual (TAU) group.
main outcome measuresPrimary objective: To measure how patients rate the quality of their decision-making experience at the time of the decision and at follow-up (SURE scale). SECONDARY
objectiveThe level of decisional satisfaction at the time of the decision and follow-up, as well as to explore the numbers of people opting for surgery for each study condition (Shared tool and patient feedback).
resultsQuality: This study demonstrates no statistically significant difference in how patients rate the quality of their treatment decision between DA and TAU, both at baseline (p = 0.553) and follow-up (p = 0.062). Satisfaction: This study showed a statistically significant level of decisional satisfaction at the time the decision was made for Qu2 of the Shared tool (U = 113, p = 0.026). No other significant difference was found between participants who received the DA and TAU.
conclusionThe DA is an acceptable and useful tool that could be incorporated into the pathway for recurrent tonsillitis, helping to eliminate physician implicit bias. However, preliminary qualitative evidence from this pilot study does not suggest that including the DA improves the quality of decision-making.
trial registrationIRAS ID - 230 362.
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.