We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Randomised trial assessing the impact of framing of fracture risk and osteoporosis treatment benefits in patients undergoing bone densitometry.
BMJ Open 2017 Februrary 11
OBJECTIVES: The accuracy of patients' perception of risk is important for decisions about treatment in many diseases. We framed the risk of fracture and benefits of treatment in different ways and assessed the impact on patients' perception of fracture risk and intentions to take medication.
DESIGN: Randomised trial of 4 different presentations of fracture risk and likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment.
SETTING: Academic centre.
PARTICIPANTS: 200 patients undergoing bone densitometry.
INTERVENTION: Presentation that framed the patient's absolute fracture risk either as the chance of having or not having an event, with their likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment in natural frequencies or numbers needed to treat.
OUTCOMES: Participants' views about their fracture risk and the need for osteoporosis treatment.
RESULTS: The median 5-year fracture risk threshold participants regarded as high enough to consider preventative medication was 50-60%, and did not change substantially after the presentation. The median (Q1, Q3) 5-year risk initially estimated by participants was 20% (10, 50) for any fracture and 19% (10, 40) for hip fracture. 61% considered their fracture risk was low or very low, and 59-67% considered their fracture risk was lower than average. These participant estimates were 2-3 times higher than Garvan calculator estimates for any fracture, and 10-20 times higher for hip fracture. Participant estimates of fracture risk halved after the presentation, but remained higher than the Garvan estimates (1.5-2 times for any fracture, 5-10 times for hip fracture). There was no difference in these outcomes between the randomised groups. Participants' intentions about taking medication to prevent fractures were not substantially affected by receiving information about fracture risk and treatment benefits.
CONCLUSIONS: Altering the framing of estimated fracture risks and treatment benefits had little effect on participants' perception of the need to take treatment or their individual fracture risk.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12613001081707; Pre-results.
DESIGN: Randomised trial of 4 different presentations of fracture risk and likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment.
SETTING: Academic centre.
PARTICIPANTS: 200 patients undergoing bone densitometry.
INTERVENTION: Presentation that framed the patient's absolute fracture risk either as the chance of having or not having an event, with their likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment in natural frequencies or numbers needed to treat.
OUTCOMES: Participants' views about their fracture risk and the need for osteoporosis treatment.
RESULTS: The median 5-year fracture risk threshold participants regarded as high enough to consider preventative medication was 50-60%, and did not change substantially after the presentation. The median (Q1, Q3) 5-year risk initially estimated by participants was 20% (10, 50) for any fracture and 19% (10, 40) for hip fracture. 61% considered their fracture risk was low or very low, and 59-67% considered their fracture risk was lower than average. These participant estimates were 2-3 times higher than Garvan calculator estimates for any fracture, and 10-20 times higher for hip fracture. Participant estimates of fracture risk halved after the presentation, but remained higher than the Garvan estimates (1.5-2 times for any fracture, 5-10 times for hip fracture). There was no difference in these outcomes between the randomised groups. Participants' intentions about taking medication to prevent fractures were not substantially affected by receiving information about fracture risk and treatment benefits.
CONCLUSIONS: Altering the framing of estimated fracture risks and treatment benefits had little effect on participants' perception of the need to take treatment or their individual fracture risk.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12613001081707; Pre-results.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app