ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Unraveling the Key Factors Behind Patient Decision Delay in Aortic Dissection Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the prevalence of patient decision delay in aortic dissection and identify its associated factors, representing the first application of the Self-Regulatory Model as a guiding theoretical framework. Patients and Methods: A total of 386 patients with aortic dissection were enrolled in this single-center, cross-sectional study. Participants were recruited from the emergency department of a tertiary cardiovascular hospital in China, using a convenience sampling methodology. Data were collected using the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, the Perceived Barriers to Healthcare-Seeking Decision Scale, and the Social Support Rating Scale. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with patient decision delay. Results: The prevalence of patient decision delay in this study was 67.88% (95% CI: 63.22% - 72.54%). Logistic regression analysis identified several potential factors associated with this delay, including education level, presence of bystanders at symptom onset, Stanford classification, and pain severity. Symptoms such as back pain, abdominal pain, profuse perspiration, and persistent unrelieved pain were also significant. Furthermore, perceived barriers and illness perception were found to be linked to decision delay. Conclusion: Decision delay is a prevalent issue among aortic dissection patients, necessitating targeted interventions. The study confirms that patient decision delay is driven by clinical factors and, crucially, by modifiable factors within the Self-Regulatory Model, such as negative illness perceptions and heightened perceived barriers. Interventions targeting these cognitive and psychosocial barriers are imperative for improving outcomes.
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.