المؤلفون: Guan, Alice, Santiago-Rodríguez, Eduardo, Chung, Benjamin, Shim, Janet, Allen, Laura, Kuo, Mei-Chin, Lau, Kathie, Loya, Zinnia, Brooks, James, Cheng, Iona, DeRouen, Mindy, Frosch, Dominick, Golden, Todd, Leppert, John, Lichtensztajn, Daphne, Lu, Qian, Oh, Debora, Sieh, Weiva, Wadhwa, Michelle, Cooperberg, Matthew, Carroll, Peter, Gomez, Scarlett, Shariff-Marco, Salma

المصدر: BMC Cancer. 23(1)

مصطلحات موضوعية: Active surveillance, Clinical factors, Educational resources, Low-risk Prostate cancer, Qualitative study, Side effects, Treatment decision making, Male, Humans, Decision Making, Physicians, Prostatic Neoplasms, Physician-Patient Relations, Qualitative Research

الوصف: BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) are confronted with a difficult decision regarding whether to undergo definitive treatment or to pursue an active surveillance protocol. This is potentially further complicated by the possibility that patients and physicians may place different value on factors that influence this decision. We conducted a qualitative investigation to better understand patient and physician perceptions of factors influencing treatment decisions for low-risk PCa. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 43 racially and ethnically diverse patients diagnosed with low-risk PCa, who were identified through a population-based cancer registry, and 15 physicians who were selected to represent a variety of practice settings in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area. RESULTS: Patients and physicians both described several key individual (e.g., clinical) and interpersonal (e.g., healthcare communications) factors as important for treatment decision-making. Overall, physicians perceptions largely mirrored patients perceptions. First, we observed differences in treatment preferences by age and stage of life. At older ages, there was a preference for less invasive options. However, at younger ages, we found varying opinions among both patients and physicians. Second, patients and physicians both described concerns about side effects including physical functioning and non-physical considerations. Third, we observed differences in expectations and the level of difficulty for clinical conversations based on information needs and resources between patients and physicians. Finally, we discovered that patients and physicians perceived patients prior knowledge and the support of family/friends as facilitators of clinical conversations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that the gap between patient and physician perceptions on the influence of clinical and communication factors on treatment decision-making is not large. The consensus we observed points to the importance of developing relevant clinical communication roadmaps as well as high quality and accessible patient education materials.

وصف الملف: application/pdf

الوصول الحر: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/35m244pwTest

المؤلفون: Wouter A. C. van Amsterdam, Pim A. de Jong, Joost J. C. Verhoeff, Tim Leiner, Rajesh Ranganath

المصدر: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 1-7 (2024)

مصطلحات موضوعية: Causal inference, Oncology, Tailored treatment decision making, Prediction research, Prognosis research, Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics, R858-859.7

الوصف: Abstract In cancer research there is much interest in building and validating outcome prediction models to support treatment decisions. However, because most outcome prediction models are developed and validated without regard to the causal aspects of treatment decision making, many published outcome prediction models may cause harm when used for decision making, despite being found accurate in validation studies. Guidelines on prediction model validation and the checklist for risk model endorsement by the American Joint Committee on Cancer do not protect against prediction models that are accurate during development and validation but harmful when used for decision making. We explain why this is the case and how to build and validate models that are useful for decision making.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/1472-6947Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/f6e200935a974217b4b942f13a79a6b1Test

المؤلفون: Taylor Woolnough, MD, Andrew M. Caines, MD, JW. Pollock, MD, MSc, FRCSC, Steven R. Papp, MD, MSc, FRCSC

المصدر: JSES International, Vol 8, Iss 1, Pp 227-231 (2024)

مصطلحات موضوعية: Olecranon fracture, Elbow fracture, Tension-band, Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), Nonoperative, Treatment decision-making, Orthopedic surgery, RD701-811, Diseases of the musculoskeletal system, RC925-935

الوصف: Background: With an aging population, the incidence of olecranon fractures in older patients is increasing. The standard of care has traditionally included operative management for displaced fractures. Recent literature has called this standard of care into question. Older patients may be at increased risk of operative complications and may have satisfactory functional outcomes with nonoperative management. Given recently evolving evidence, the current treatment preferences of orthopedic surgeons for older patients with displaced olecranon fractures are unknown. Methods: We administered a cross-sectional survey of Canadian orthopedic surgeons via e-mail invitation and online survey form to determine treatment preferences for patients aged 65-75 and >75 years with simple displaced and comminuted displaced stable olecranon fractures. Respondents reviewed representative images and were asked to indicate their preferred treatment based on patient age. We also asked respondents to indicate their perceived importance of 11 patient factors on treatment decision-making. Results: We received 200 responses (33.8% response rate). For patients aged 65-75 years with simple displaced fractures, surgeons preferred tension-band wiring (n = 110, 56%) to plating (n = 82, 42%, P = .005), while only 3% (n = 5) preferred nonoperative treatment. For patients aged >75 years with simple displaced fractures, surgeons preferred operative (n = 144, 73%) to nonoperative management (n = 51, 26%; P 75 years (n = 131, 68%). In patients aged >75 years, this was followed by early range of motion (n = 35, 18%) and immobilization (n = 24, 13%). Of the 11 factors surveyed, participation in high-intensity activities (mean rank = 9.4), independent living (mean rank = 8.8), and disrupted extensor mechanism (mean rank = 8.3) were ranked most highly for increasing likelihood of surgical treatment. Conclusion: In patients aged 65 to 75 years, operative management is favored by most surgeons, with tension-band wiring preferred over plating for simple displaced fractures. In patients aged >75 years, operative management is again preferred by most respondents for simple and comminuted fractures. Despite operative preferences, there is a paucity of quality evidence to guide treatment decision-making, particularly in patients aged >75 years.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666638323002670Test; https://doaj.org/toc/2666-6383Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/1b9ba84064de4482bdb22ad4465dde48Test

المؤلفون: Penelope Schofield, Amelia Hyatt, Alan White, Fiona White, Mark Frydenberg, Suzanne Chambers, Robert Gardiner, Declan G. Murphy, Lawrence Cavedon, Jeremy Millar, Natalie Richards, Barbara Murphy, Ilona Juraskova

المصدر: BJUI Compass, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 121-141 (2024)

مصطلحات موضوعية: active surveillance, low‐risk prostate cancer, online decision aid, prostate‐specific antigen, treatment decision‐making, Diseases of the genitourinary system. Urology, RC870-923

الوصف: Abstract Objectives To develop an online treatment decision aid (OTDA) to assist patients with low‐risk prostate cancer (LRPC) and their partners in making treatment decisions. Patients and methods Navigate, an OTDA for LRPC, was rigorously co‐designed by patients with a confirmed diagnosis or at risk of LRPC and their partners, clinicians, researchers and website designers/developers. A theoretical model guided the development process. A mixed methods approach was used incorporating (1) evidence for essential design elements for OTDAs; (2) evidence for treatment options for LRPC; (3) an iterative co‐design process involving stakeholder workshops and prototype review; and (4) expert rating using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). Three co‐design workshops with potential users (n = 12) and research and web‐design team members (n = 10) were conducted. Results from each workshop informed OTDA modifications to the OTDA for testing in the subsequent workshop. Clinician (n = 6) and consumer (n = 9) feedback on usability and content on the penultimate version was collected. Results The initial workshops identified key content and design features that were incorporated into the draft OTDA, re‐workshopped and incorporated into the penultimate OTDA. Expert feedback on usability and content was also incorporated into the final OTDA. The final OTDA was deemed comprehensive, clear and appropriate and met all IPDAS criteria. Conclusion Navigate is an interactive and acceptable OTDA for Australian men with LRPC designed by men for men using a co‐design methodology. The effectiveness of Navigate in assisting patient decision‐making is currently being assessed in a randomised controlled trial with patients with LRPC and their partners.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/2688-4526Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/eb540f80bd324f9780339950b66dc1aaTest

المؤلفون: Yeo HY, Wong JHY, Chan SJ, Latu ATF, Han CH, Anwar M, Marra CA

المصدر: Patient Preference and Adherence, Vol Volume 17, Pp 3525-3537 (2023)

مصطلحات موضوعية: qualitative research, patient preference, breast cancer, reflexive thematic analysis, treatment preference, treatment decision-making, Medicine (General), R5-920

الوصف: Hui Yee Yeo,1,2 Jacqueline Hui Yi Wong,3 Suz Jack Chan,1 Anna Tiatia Fa’atoese Latu,1 Catherine H Han,4,5 Mudassir Anwar,1 Carlo A Marra1 1School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; 2Clinical Research Center, Hospital Seberang Jaya, Seberang Jaya, Penang, Malaysia; 3Pharmacy Department, Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 4Auckland Oncology, Auckland, New Zealand; 5Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New ZealandCorrespondence: Carlo A Marra, School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand, Tel +64-34797275, Fax +64-34797034, Email carlo.marra@otago.ac.nzPurpose: Despite the importance of acknowledging patient preferences in treatment decision-making, little is known about the treatment preferences and the factors underlying those preferences of breast cancer patients. This study aims explore patient experience and perspective regarding treatment preferences and identify the important determinants that shape these preferences in the context of New Zealand.Patients and Methods: Semi-structured online interviews comprised of six focus group discussions and five individual interviews were performed with 26 breast cancer patients. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the reflexive thematic analysis approach.Results: Four main themes were derived: (1) positive treatment outcomes; (2) the negative impact of treatment-related side effects on quality of life; (3) treatment accessibility, availability, and timeliness; (4) cost of treatment. Patients revealed a strong preference towards treatments that yield longer survival, achieve remission, and prevent cancer recurrence. Additionally, patients favored treatments with minimal side effects that had minimal impact on their quality of life. There was a notable preference for treatments that were easily accessible and available in a timely manner. However, patients faced challenging decisions in balancing the costs of treatments with their benefits, leading to a consistent preference for treatments supported by government funding or medical insurance to alleviate financial burdens.Conclusion: Our study reveals that breast cancer patients in New Zealand have different perceptions and preferences regarding cancer treatment. Patients frequently find themselves making trade-offs among various attributes of a treatment, aligning these decisions with their personal values and beliefs. By considering these preferences and trade-offs in future studies that measure patient preferences, healthcare professionals can enhance their support for patients in making informed choices that align with their values and priorities. Additionally, healthcare policymakers can develop patient-centered policies that cater to the unique needs and preferences of breast cancer patients.Plain Language Summary: Breast cancer is a significant health concern in New Zealand, affecting both the well-being of patients and their families. Despite advancements in treatment, patient preferences regarding treatment risks and benefits are often neglected. This study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by qualitatively exploring the unique experiences and preferences of breast cancer patients in New Zealand, shedding light on the factors influencing their treatment decisions. The study involved a series of interviews with a group of 26 women living with breast cancer. The interview revealed four main themes that shape patients’ preferences for breast cancer treatment: 1. Positive outcomes: Patients revealed a strong preference towards treatments that yield longer survival, achieve remission, and prevent cancer recurrence. 2. Quality of life: Treatment-related side effects negatively impacted patients’ quality of life, affecting them physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, and psychosocially. Patients preferred a treatment that entailed few side effects with minimal impact on their quality of life. 3. Treatment accessibility and timeliness: Patients expressed concerns about administrative complexities, long distances to healthcare facilities, timely treatment, and restricted access to treatment options in the country. There was a notable preference for treatments that were easily accessible and available in a timely manner. 4. Cost of treatment: Balancing the cost of treatments with their benefits posed challenging decisions for patients, who consistently voiced a preference for treatments supported by government funding or medical insurance.The study highlights diverse perspectives and preferences among breast cancer patients in New Zealand about treatment preference. Patients frequently find themselves making trade-offs concerning various attributes of a treatment that align with their individual values and beliefs. Integrating these preferences and trade-offs into future studies and healthcare policies can help healthcare professionals and policymakers better support patients in making informed choices aligned with their values, fostering a more patient-centered healthcare system.Keywords: qualitative research, patient preference, breast cancer, reflexive thematic analysis, treatment preference, treatment decision-making

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://www.dovepress.com/exploring-the-important-determinants-shapingTest-treatment-preferences-qua-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-PPA; https://doaj.org/toc/1177-889XTest

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/13541ddc33d9428aab96ae1a9803176bTest

المؤلفون: Alice Guan, Eduardo J. Santiago-Rodríguez, Benjamin I. Chung, Janet K. Shim, Laura Allen, Mei-Chin Kuo, Kathie Lau, Zinnia Loya, James D. Brooks, Iona Cheng, Mindy C. DeRouen, Dominick L. Frosch, Todd Golden, John T. Leppert, Daphne Y. Lichtensztajn, Qian Lu, Debora Oh, Weiva Sieh, Michelle Wadhwa, Matthew R. Cooperberg, Peter R. Carroll, Scarlett L. Gomez, Salma Shariff-Marco

المصدر: BMC Cancer, Vol 23, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2023)

مصطلحات موضوعية: Low-risk Prostate cancer, Treatment decision making, Active surveillance, Educational resources, Side effects, Clinical factors, Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, RC254-282

الوصف: Abstract Background Patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) are confronted with a difficult decision regarding whether to undergo definitive treatment or to pursue an active surveillance protocol. This is potentially further complicated by the possibility that patients and physicians may place different value on factors that influence this decision. We conducted a qualitative investigation to better understand patient and physician perceptions of factors influencing treatment decisions for low-risk PCa. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 43 racially and ethnically diverse patients diagnosed with low-risk PCa, who were identified through a population-based cancer registry, and 15 physicians who were selected to represent a variety of practice settings in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area. Results Patients and physicians both described several key individual (e.g., clinical) and interpersonal (e.g., healthcare communications) factors as important for treatment decision-making. Overall, physicians’ perceptions largely mirrored patients’ perceptions. First, we observed differences in treatment preferences by age and stage of life. At older ages, there was a preference for less invasive options. However, at younger ages, we found varying opinions among both patients and physicians. Second, patients and physicians both described concerns about side effects including physical functioning and non-physical considerations. Third, we observed differences in expectations and the level of difficulty for clinical conversations based on information needs and resources between patients and physicians. Finally, we discovered that patients and physicians perceived patients’ prior knowledge and the support of family/friends as facilitators of clinical conversations. Conclusions Our study suggests that the gap between patient and physician perceptions on the influence of clinical and communication factors on treatment decision-making is not large. The consensus we observed points to the importance of developing relevant clinical communication roadmaps as well as high quality and accessible patient education materials.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2407Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/aabab07a25854885916d582e6006fec5Test

المؤلفون: Mengqian Zhang, Xiaoning He, Jing Wu, Feng Xie

المصدر: BMC Cancer, Vol 23, Iss 1, Pp 1-13 (2023)

مصطلحات موضوعية: Cancer treatment decision-making, Preference difference, Systematic review, Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, RC254-282

الوصف: Abstract Background Shared decision-making is useful to facilitate cancer treatment decisions. However, it is difficult to make treatment decisions when physician and patient preferences are different. This review aimed to summarize and compare the preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus. Studies elicited and compared preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients were included. Information about the study design and preference measuring attributes or questions were extracted. The available relative rank of every attribute in discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies and answers to preference measuring questions in non-DCE studies were summarized followed by a narrative synthesis to reflect the preference differences. Results Of 12,959 studies identified, 8290 were included in the title and abstract screening and 48 were included in the full text screening. Included 37 studies measured the preferences from six treatment-related aspects: health benefit, adverse effects, treatment process, cost, impact on quality of life, and provider qualification. The trade-off between health benefit and adverse effects was the main focus of the included studies. DCE studies showed patients gave a higher rank on health benefit and treatment process, while physicians gave a higher rank on adverse effects. Non-DCE studies suggested that patients were willing to take a higher risk of adverse effects or lower health benefit than physicians when accepting a treatment. Conclusions Physicians and patients had important preference differences for cancer treatment. More sufficient communication is needed in cancer treatment decision-making.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2407Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/8025f61286d44f07b92fd659fef9799cTest

المؤلفون: Sascha M. Keij, Anne M. Stiggelbout, Arwen H. Pieterse

المصدر: Health Expectations, Vol 27, Iss 2, Pp n/a-n/a (2024)

مصطلحات موضوعية: patient readiness, questionnaire, shared decision making, treatment decision making, Medicine (General), R5-920, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270

الوصف: Abstract Introduction Shared decision making (SDM) requires an active role of both clinicians and patients. We aimed to conceptualise patient readiness for SDM about treatment, and to develop a patient questionnaire to assess readiness. Methods We used the results of a scoping review and a qualitative study to inform the patient readiness construct. We conducted five additional rounds of data collection to finalise the construct definition and develop the Patient Readiness for SDM Questionnaire (ReadySDM) in an oncological setting: (1) longitudinal interviews with patients with cancer during and after a treatment decision‐making process; (2) a pilot study among experts, clinicians, and patients for feedback on the concept and items; (3) a field test among (former) patients with cancer to test item format and content validity, and to reduce the number of items; (4) cognitive interviews with people with low literacy to test the comprehensibility of the questionnaire; and (5) a field test among (former) patients who faced a cancer treatment decision in the last year, to test the content validity of the final version of the questionnaire. Results A total of 251 people participated in the various rounds of data collection. We identified eight elements of patient readiness for SDM about treatment: (1) understanding of and attitude towards SDM; (2) information skills; (3) skills in communicating and claiming space; (4) self‐awareness; (5) consideration skills; (6) self‐efficacy; (7) emotional distress; and (8) experienced time. We developed the 20‐item ReadySDM to retrospectively measure these elements in an oncological setting. Conclusion We conducted a thorough procedure to conceptualise patient readiness and to develop the ReadySDM. The questionnaire aims to provide novel insights into ways to enhance SDM in daily practice. Patient or Public Contribution Multiple people with lived experience were involved in various phases of the study. They were asked for input on the study design, the conceptualisation of readiness, and the development of the questionnaire.

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/1369-6513Test; https://doaj.org/toc/1369-7625Test

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/138d6a1b7bd245dd97095d2497be144aTest

المؤلفون: Yeo HY, Liew AC, Chan SJ, Anwar M, Han CHW, Marra CA

المصدر: Patient Preference and Adherence, Vol Volume 17, Pp 2679-2706 (2023)

مصطلحات موضوعية: breast cancer, patient preference, treatment decision making, narrative scoping review, Medicine (General), R5-920

الوصف: Hui Yee Yeo,1,2 Ai Ch’i Liew,2 Suz Jack Chan,1 Mudassir Anwar,1 Catherine Hye-Won Han,3 Carlo A Marra1 1School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; 2Clinical Research Center, Hospital Seberang Jaya, Penang, Malaysia; 3Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New ZealandCorrespondence: Carlo A Marra, School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand, Tel +64-34797275, Fax +64-34797034, Email carlo.marra@otago.ac.nzObjective: Conventionally, optimal treatment strategies for breast cancer have been largely determined by physicians, with a scant understanding of patients’ treatment values and preferences. Incorporating patient preferences in the decision-making process for breast cancer treatment is gaining recognition and can potentially improve treatment outcomes and compliance. This scoping review aims to synthesize evidence on the key determinants that are most valued by breast cancer patients when deciding on their treatment options.Methods: We searched three electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and CINAHL Plus) utilizing a systematic scoping review method. Two reviewers independently screened, applied inclusion criteria, reviewed, and synthesized findings. A mixed-method narrative approach combining the inductive thematic analysis and content analysis methodologies was used to synthesize and summarize the findings.Results: The review included 22 studies, leading to the conceptualization of 5 overarching themes and 17 sub-themes. Among these, the most frequently cited theme was treatment benefits, followed by treatment-related process, treatment-related risk, quality of life, and cost of treatment. Women with breast cancer highly value treatments that offer good effectiveness, prolong survival, prevent recurrence, and maintain quality of life. Patient concerns include treatment-related side effects, safety, the risk of secondary cancer, and direct or indirect out-of-pocket costs. Additionally, patients also consider treatment duration, mode of administration, physician recommendation, and treatment availability and accessibility when deciding on their preferred treatment.Conclusion: The evidence synthesized in this review offers insights into refining breast cancer treatment strategies to align more closely with patient values. Recognizing and integrating patient perspectives in breast cancer care could potentially lead to improved treatment outcomes, enhanced patient compliance, and more personalized care. Healthcare professionals are encouraged to incorporate these key determinants in their treatment decision-making processes, aiming to deliver a patient-centered care that aligns with the unique preferences and values of each patient.Plain Language Summary: Breast cancer is a significant health concern, and treatment decisions have traditionally driven by physicians, often without due consideration for patients’ preferences in their treatment choices. This scoping review aimed to explore and summarize what matters most to breast cancer patients when deciding on their treatment options. We found five main themes that were important to patients:Effectiveness: Patients highly value treatments that are effective in fighting cancer, prolonging survival, and preventing recurrence.Treatment-related process: The length of treatment and availability of different therapies influenced patients’ choices. Patients trust their doctors’ expertise but also value being involved in the decision-making process to have their preferences considered.Side Effects and Safety: Concerns about treatment-related side effects and the risk of secondary cancer were critical factors in decision-making.Quality of Life: Maintaining a good quality of life during treatment is crucial for patients.Financial Burden: The additional direct and indirect out-of-pocket costs of treatment were important considerations for patients.Understanding patients’ preferences is vital in developing personalized treatments that align with their values. Healthcare professionals need to communicate effectively with patients and involve them in the decision-making process. Patient decision aids and tailored financial assistance programs could also be helpful. Further research is needed to identify effective strategies to tailor treatments to meet patients’ preferences. Overall, this review sheds light on what matters most to breast cancer patients, empowering them to be more active participants in their treatment decisions and potentially improving treatment outcomes and overall well-being.Keywords: breast cancer, patient preference, treatment decision making, narrative scoping review

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://www.dovepress.com/understanding-patient-preferences-regarding-the-important-determinants-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-PPATest; https://doaj.org/toc/1177-889XTest

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/9b1cd883dee1471dbf4c4ae981f0ba72Test

المؤلفون: Oluwatobiloba Ayo‐Ajibola, Ryan J. Davis, Claire Therriault, Christopher Lamb, Deborah Choe, Matthew E. Lin, Trevor E. Angell, Daniel I. Kwon

المصدر: OTO Open, Vol 8, Iss 1, Pp n/a-n/a (2024)

مصطلحات موضوعية: DISCERN, Graves' disease, social media, treatment decision‐making, YouTube, Otorhinolaryngology, RF1-547, Surgery, RD1-811

الوصف: Abstract Objective To understand the quality of informational Graves' disease (GD) videos on YouTube for treatment decision‐making quality and inclusion of American Thyroid Association (ATA) treatment guidelines. Study Design Cross‐sectional cohort. Setting Informational YouTube videos with subject matter “Graves' Disease treatment.” Method The top 50 videos based on our query were assessed using the DISCERN instrument. This validated algorithm discretely rates treatment‐related information from excellent (≥4.5) to very poor (

وصف الملف: electronic resource

العلاقة: https://doaj.org/toc/2473-974XTest

الوصول الحر: https://doaj.org/article/27ea66741d204c1fa19d09ba6aec2da6Test