Trial reportBMJ health & care informatics2025
Effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for patients with Generalised Anxiety Disorder in Spain: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ health & care informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04364958 (The Effectiveness of a Web-based Decision Aid for Patients With Generalized Anxiety Disorder), which is not on this 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.
The Effectiveness of a Web-based Decision Aid for Patients With Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of an online Patient Decision Aid (PtDA) for patients with Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD).
designRandomised controlled trial comparing the PtDA to general information (fact sheet).
settingThe study took place in 17 primary care centres in the Canary Islands (Spain).
participantsPatients diagnosed with GAD and a score ≥8 in the GAD-7 questionnaire.
interventionPatients were randomly allocated to the PtDA group (n=58) or the control group (n=61).
main outcome measureThe primary outcome was decisional conflict at postintervention, assessed with the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Secondary outcomes include knowledge about GAD and its treatments, concordance between informed preference and 3 month actual choice, decision quality and GAD symptoms.
resultsThere were no significant differences in decisional conflict at postintervention or 3 month follow-up in the intention-to-treat (ITT) or per-protocol sample (PPS). The PtDA significantly improved postintervention (MD=1.65, 95% CI: 0.84 to 2.46) and 3 month objective knowledge (MD=0.78, 95% CI: 0.02 to 1.55). In the PPS, anxiety symptoms at 3 months were significantly lower in the PtDA group (MD=-3.00, 95% CI: -5.69 to -0.30), but in the ITT sample, this difference did not reach significance (p=0.06). There were no significant differences in the rate of patients unsure about treatment preference at postintervention, nor on concordance or decision quality at follow-up.
conclusionThe use of the PtDA led to improvements in knowledge at 3 months, but it did not result in a significant reduction of decisional conflict. These results must be interpreted with caution, given the methodological limitations of the study, mainly the high rate of dropouts. Further research is needed to confirm these results, the first published on the effectiveness of a PtDA for GAD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04364958.
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.