Krystina B Lewis, Ian D Graham, Sandra B Lauck, Meg E Carley, Carol Bennett, Semhal Gessese, Dawn Stacey
{"title":"患者决策辅助心血管决策的有效性:基于性别/性别分析的系统评价。","authors":"Krystina B Lewis, Ian D Graham, Sandra B Lauck, Meg E Carley, Carol Bennett, Semhal Gessese, Dawn Stacey","doi":"10.1093/eurjcn/zvaf103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Determine effectiveness of cardiovascular patient decision aids (PtDAs), assess consideration for sex and/or gender in included trials, and report whether PtDAs included sex/gender information in personal cardiovascular risk calculations, benefits or harms.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Systematic review with meta-analysis. Independent reviewers screened 209 trials in the 2024 Cochrane Review of PtDAs for eligible cardiovascular trials with updated search to February 2025. Primary outcomes: attributes of the decision quality and decision-making process. We conducted meta-analysis for similarly measured outcomes. We assessed sex/gender considerations according to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' recommendations.Thirty-two trials evaluated PtDAs versus usual care on cardiovascular screening (n=3 trials; 9.4%), prevention (n=4; 12.5%), and treatment (25; 78.1%) decisions. There was no difference between groups on decision quality (2 trials). Patients exposed to PtDAs had significantly improved decision-making process outcomes: 12% greater knowledge (20 trials), 127% more accurate risk perceptions (7 trials), 10% feel less uninformed (12 trials), 8% less unclear values (12 trials), and 31% less clinician-controlled decision-making. There were no harms. All 32 trials reported sex or gender with 15 (47%) using appropriate terms. One trial reported outcomes separately by sex, but not by study arm. Six (19%) discussed influence of sex/gender on trial findings. Fourteen (43.8%) PtDAs included sex/gender personalized cardiovascular risk scores. supp.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cardiovascular PtDAs improve quality of the decision-making process. Less than half of trials used appropriate sex/gender terms and only one reported findings separately by sex/gender. Future PtDA research must improve sex and gender-based reporting and analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":93997,"journal":{"name":"European journal of cardiovascular nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of patient decision aids for cardiovascular decisions: Systematic review with sex/gender-based analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Krystina B Lewis, Ian D Graham, Sandra B Lauck, Meg E Carley, Carol Bennett, Semhal Gessese, Dawn Stacey\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurjcn/zvaf103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Determine effectiveness of cardiovascular patient decision aids (PtDAs), assess consideration for sex and/or gender in included trials, and report whether PtDAs included sex/gender information in personal cardiovascular risk calculations, benefits or harms.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Systematic review with meta-analysis. Independent reviewers screened 209 trials in the 2024 Cochrane Review of PtDAs for eligible cardiovascular trials with updated search to February 2025. Primary outcomes: attributes of the decision quality and decision-making process. We conducted meta-analysis for similarly measured outcomes. We assessed sex/gender considerations according to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' recommendations.Thirty-two trials evaluated PtDAs versus usual care on cardiovascular screening (n=3 trials; 9.4%), prevention (n=4; 12.5%), and treatment (25; 78.1%) decisions. There was no difference between groups on decision quality (2 trials). Patients exposed to PtDAs had significantly improved decision-making process outcomes: 12% greater knowledge (20 trials), 127% more accurate risk perceptions (7 trials), 10% feel less uninformed (12 trials), 8% less unclear values (12 trials), and 31% less clinician-controlled decision-making. There were no harms. All 32 trials reported sex or gender with 15 (47%) using appropriate terms. One trial reported outcomes separately by sex, but not by study arm. Six (19%) discussed influence of sex/gender on trial findings. Fourteen (43.8%) PtDAs included sex/gender personalized cardiovascular risk scores. supp.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cardiovascular PtDAs improve quality of the decision-making process. Less than half of trials used appropriate sex/gender terms and only one reported findings separately by sex/gender. Future PtDA research must improve sex and gender-based reporting and analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of cardiovascular nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of cardiovascular nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvaf103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of cardiovascular nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvaf103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effectiveness of patient decision aids for cardiovascular decisions: Systematic review with sex/gender-based analysis.
Aims: Determine effectiveness of cardiovascular patient decision aids (PtDAs), assess consideration for sex and/or gender in included trials, and report whether PtDAs included sex/gender information in personal cardiovascular risk calculations, benefits or harms.
Methods and results: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Independent reviewers screened 209 trials in the 2024 Cochrane Review of PtDAs for eligible cardiovascular trials with updated search to February 2025. Primary outcomes: attributes of the decision quality and decision-making process. We conducted meta-analysis for similarly measured outcomes. We assessed sex/gender considerations according to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' recommendations.Thirty-two trials evaluated PtDAs versus usual care on cardiovascular screening (n=3 trials; 9.4%), prevention (n=4; 12.5%), and treatment (25; 78.1%) decisions. There was no difference between groups on decision quality (2 trials). Patients exposed to PtDAs had significantly improved decision-making process outcomes: 12% greater knowledge (20 trials), 127% more accurate risk perceptions (7 trials), 10% feel less uninformed (12 trials), 8% less unclear values (12 trials), and 31% less clinician-controlled decision-making. There were no harms. All 32 trials reported sex or gender with 15 (47%) using appropriate terms. One trial reported outcomes separately by sex, but not by study arm. Six (19%) discussed influence of sex/gender on trial findings. Fourteen (43.8%) PtDAs included sex/gender personalized cardiovascular risk scores. supp.
Conclusion: Cardiovascular PtDAs improve quality of the decision-making process. Less than half of trials used appropriate sex/gender terms and only one reported findings separately by sex/gender. Future PtDA research must improve sex and gender-based reporting and analysis.