↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of decision boxes on shared decision-making processes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of decision boxes on shared decision-making processes
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12911-015-0134-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anik MC Giguere, Michel Labrecque, France Légaré, Roland Grad, Michel Cauchon, Matthew Greenway, R Brian Haynes, Pierre Pluye, Iqra Syed, Debi Banerjee, Pierre-Hugues Carmichael, Mélanie Martin

Abstract

Decision boxes (DBoxes) are two-page evidence summaries to prepare clinicians for shared decision making (SDM). We sought to assess the feasibility of a clustered Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) to evaluate their impact. A convenience sample of clinicians (nurses, physicians and residents) from six primary healthcare clinics who received eight DBoxes and rated their interest in the topic and satisfaction. After consultations, their patients rated their involvement in decision-making processes (SDM-Q-9 instrument). We measured clinic and clinician recruitment rates, questionnaire completion rates, patient eligibility rates, and estimated the RCT needed sample size. Among the 20 family medicine clinics invited to participate in this study, four agreed to participate, giving an overall recruitment rate of 20%. Of 148 clinicians invited to the study, 93 participated (63%). Clinicians rated an interest in the topics ranging 6.4-8.2 out of 10 (with 10 highest) and a satisfaction with DBoxes of 4 or 5 out of 5 (with 5 highest) for 81% DBoxes. For the future RCT, we estimated that a sample size of 320 patients would allow detecting a 9% mean difference in the SDM-Q-9 ratings between our two arms (0.02 ICC; 0.05 significance level; 80% power). Clinicians' recruitment and questionnaire completion rates support the feasibility of the planned RCT. The level of interest of participants for the DBox topics, and their level of satisfaction with the Dboxes demonstrate the acceptability of the intervention. Processes to recruit clinics and patients should be optimized.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 23%
Researcher 13 19%
Professor 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 19 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2015.
All research outputs
#6,243,001
of 25,262,379 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#515
of 2,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,242
of 261,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,262,379 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,137 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 261,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.