MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306836208 · doi:10.31083/j.rcm2310353

Systematic Review of Patient Decision Aids for Stroke Prevention Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Management

2022· review· en· W4306836208 on OpenAlex
Justin Baers, Joel Adekanye, Glen Hazlewood, Jan M. Davies, Jeff K. Caird, Stephen B. Wilton

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationStroke (engine)Management of atrial fibrillationDecision aidsIntensive care medicineCardiologyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is a major cause of stroke. Oral anticoagulation can reduce the risk of AF-associated stroke by 65% but it remains underused. Stroke prevention therapy in patients with AF has been considered a good target for shared decision making with patient decision aids as it is a long-term, preference-sensitive decision with known risk-benefit trade-offs. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize published literature on the effectiveness of patient decision aids on the choice of and adherence to stroke prevention therapy in individuals with AF. Methods: We conducted a structured literature search for prospective studies evaluating decision aids for AF stroke prevention therapy in adult patients with nonvalvular AF. We included studies that compared those exposed to a decision aid with a control condition for outcomes including choice of therapy, adherence, decisional conflict and patient knowledge. Quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible due to excessive between-study heterogeneity. Results: Eight studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Six studies were randomized clinical trials and two were pre-post comparisons. Of the 8 studies, each evaluated a different decision aid, with only three including all contemporary oral anticoagulant drugs. All decision aids improved AF knowledge compared to baseline or control and decision aids reduced decisional conflict in four of six studies. However, there were inconsistent effects of the studied decision aids on initiation of oral anticoagulation. Adherence to initial stroke prevention therapy choice appeared to benefit from decision aid use in 2 studies that addressed this issue. Conclusions: Decision aids for stroke prevention increased AF patients' knowledge and decisional confidence but had variable impacts on choice of and adherence to stroke prevention therapy. The results highlight the need for well-designed decision aids that present patients with all contemporary therapeutic options.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.266
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it