ReviewBMJ open respiratory research2025
Improving shared decision-making in bronchiectasis.
Review in BMJ open respiratory research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Management of Difficult Exacerbations of Bronchiectasis: A Case Study to Illustrate How Guidelines Can Support Best Practice.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bronchiectasis is a heterogeneous lung disease. There is an increasing focus on personalised medicine in bronchiectasis, with targeted pharmacological interventions for inflammation, immunology and infection. Airway clearance techniques (ACTs) are non-pharmacological treatments used to manage bronchiectasis. Approximately half of patients with bronchiectasis perform ACTs. There have been attempts to personalise ACT prescriptions, including consideration of patient physiology, disease status and psychosocial factors. Guidelines suggest that patient preference or choice should be considered when prescribing ACTs. There is a lack of literature showing patient preference or choice being taken into consideration when prescribing ACTs in bronchiectasis. This article discusses the role of shared decision-making (SDM), the potential use of SDM for ACTs in bronchiectasis to support patient choice of and adherence to ACTs and the steps involved in designing an SDM intervention for ACTs in bronchiectasis for future research. Development and use of an SDM intervention to support patient choice of ACT in bronchiectasis may result in a patient-centred, pragmatic approach to empower patients to be actively involved in their care, improve their knowledge on the importance of ACTs and support improvement in adherence to this essential therapy.
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.