ArticleThe Journal of cardiovascular nursing2025
Shared Decision-Making in Severe Aortic Stenosis: Experiences and Needs of Older Patients.
Article in The Journal of cardiovascular nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Update to the Middle-Range Theory of Self-Care of Chronic Illness.ANS. Advances in nursing scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe experiences and preferences of older patients regarding shared decision-making (SDM) for managing severe aortic stenosis (AS) and its impact on health outcomes are not well known.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to provide insight into the experiences, preferences, and needs for SDM of older patients with severe AS and the associations between perceived SDM levels and patients' quality of life, depression, and anxiety.
methodsA descriptive, exploratory multiple-methods study was conducted using a survey, focus groups, and individual interviews with patients 70 years and older with severe AS. Data were collected at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. Quantitative data were analyzed using multivariate linear regression and quantitative data using qualitative thematic analysis.
resultsQuantitative analysis (n = 120) showed that 29.6% of patients reported maximum scores for the perceived SDM level. In addition, the perceived SDM level was significantly associated with the quality of life category environment ( B = 2.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-4.61; P = .004). Professionals' identification of discussion partners was reported by 41.3% of patients, and 52% of patients reported professionals' exploration of patients' daily lives. For future decision-making, 55.6% of patients preferred a collaborative role. Qualitative analysis of 2 focus groups (n = 10) and interviews (n = 7) revealed patients' preference for informal caregivers' support for decision-making. Patients expressed caution in sharing views on their daily lives and expectations and suggested better preparation and goal exploration for decision-making.
conclusionsTo align with SDM and personalize the decision-making process, healthcare professionals must foster patient input and engage informal caregivers. Patients must reflect on their daily activities to define their treatment goals.
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.