Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41969831›Full record

ArticleGlobal health research and policy2026

Exploring methodology for investigating Chinese coronary artery disease patient values and preferences: A methodological study protocol.

Changning Liu, Gordon Guyatt, Yunxian Zhou, Hongling Chu, Linan Zeng, Ruijin Qiu, Tianqi Zuo, Fengxia Lin, Shichao Lv, Xiaoyu Zhang and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health research and policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Changning LiuDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Gordon GuyattDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Yunxian ZhouSchool of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China.
Hongling ChuResearch Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Linan ZengPharmacy Department/Evidence-based Pharmacy Centre/Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ruijin QiuDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Tianqi ZuoDongfang Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Fengxia LinDepartment of Cardiology, Shenzhen Bao'an Chinese Medicine Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Shichao LvFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Chinese Medicine Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Tianjin, China.
Xiaoyu ZhangInstitute of Clinical Basic Medicine of Traditional Chinese Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Rui ZhengDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Siyu YanCenter for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Zumao CaoDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Miao QuNeurology Department, Xuan Wu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Gang SunDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Qinwei FuDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Hamed MovahedDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Yinghui JinCenter for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Hongcai ShangKey Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a leading cause of global mortality and disability. CAD patients face tradeoffs between antithrombotic therapy benefits and bleeding risks, underscoring the need to incorporate patient values and preferences into clinical guidelines. Establishing minimal important differences (MIDs) for patient-important outcomes supports clinical guideline development by determining the smallest change in outcomes that patients consider important. However, directly conducting patient surveys to establish MIDs presents several methodological challenges. Methods: We established a multidisciplinary working group to guide the MID investigation. Using a three-phase process, we identified key outcomes through literature review and discussion. We will develop draft health outcome descriptions by synthesizing evidence from clinical guidelines and qualitative studies, supplemented with patient interviews, and refine the drafts through iterative cognitive interviews. We then designed outcome-specific draft MID questionnaires and will employ cognitive interviews to assess clarity and comprehensibility. Discussion: This study will develop standard materials for surveying patient values and determining MIDs in Chinese CAD patients. The resulting methodology will support future investigations into patient-important outcomes and provide critical evidence for clinical guideline development.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseasePatient PreferenceChinaEast Asian PeopleHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical practice guidelinesCognitive interviewCoronary artery diseaseMinimal important differencePatient values and preferences

Identifiers

PMID41969831
PMCPMC13068842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.