Trial reportBMJ open2026
Factors influencing the decision to accept or decline aortic valve replacement for asymptomatic aortic stenosis: a nested longitudinal qualitative substudy of the EASY-AS randomised trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04204915 (A Randomised Controlled Trial of Early Valve Replacement in Severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis), 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.
A Randomised Controlled Trial of Early Valve Replacement in Severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine how patients and family members decide whether to accept a highly invasive intervention (aortic valve replacement (AVR)) when their condition (aortic stenosis (AS)) is asymptomatic and its course uncertain.
designNested, longitudinal, qualitative substudy of an ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCT) (NCT04204915) testing early intervention (EI) versus watchful waiting (WW) in patients with asymptomatic severe AS.
settingSix select UK sites of the RCT.
participantsSelect participants of the RCT, their next-of-kin and some who declined RCT participation.
results73 interviews were conducted, with 41 participants.Few knew much about AS before diagnosis. Uncertainty and the need for reliable information regarding symptoms and progress was a significant problem.While some expressed unease at a major intervention for an asymptomatic condition, there were no outright objections to the idea.Those who declined participation in the RCT did so for personal reasons, for example, their home circumstances did not permit the required period of recovery or they felt too old to risk intervention.Reasons for accepting early intervention included the belief that the condition was serious and likely to deteriorate, and so better to have the intervention before such deterioration, as well as avoiding long waiting lists. Trusting clinicians' judgement played a part in some decisions. Patients also wanted choice in the type of intervention received.The longitudinal interviews (n=32) showed satisfaction in the early intervention group despite some problems in the the early recovery phase, especially for those undergoing surgical AVR.
conclusionsWhere evidence supports major intervention for an asymptomatic condition, patients are likely to accept the offer, although personal circumstances play an important role in decision-making. Where a condition is not well known to the public, such as AS, patients rely on clinicians and other resources to help decide. Liaison with patient groups in developing shared decision-making resources may help with complex decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04204915.
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.