Evidence mapPaperPMID 38993756Full record

ArticleFrontiers in transplantation2024

The role of the purposeful shared decision making model in vascularized composite allotransplantation.

Ian G Hargraves, Kasey R Boehmer, Hatem Amer, Cassie C Kennedy, Joan M Griffin, Dawn M Finnie, Victor M Montori, Fantley Clay Smither, Samir Mardini, Steven Moran and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ian G HargravesKnowledge and Encounter Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Kasey R BoehmerKnowledge and Encounter Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Hatem AmerDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Cassie C KennedyDivision of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Joan M GriffinDivision of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Dawn M FinnieRobert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Victor M MontoriKnowledge and Encounter Research (KER) Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Fantley Clay SmitherDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Samir MardiniDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Steven MoranDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Sheila Jowsey-GregoireDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.

Funding

The Role of Patient Capacity in Chronic Kidney Disease TrajectoriesK01DK133643 · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · 2025 to 2025
$150k
NCATS NIH HHS L30 TR002972NIDDK NIH HHS K01 DK133643
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For some patients who have lost the lower part of an arm, hand transplant offers the possibility of receiving a new limb with varying degrees of sensation and function. This procedure, Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (VCA), is demanding for patients and their care community and comes with significant risks. As a high-stakes decision, patients interested in VCA are subject to extensive clinical evaluation and eligibility decision making. Patients and their care community must also decide if hand transplant (versus other approaches including rehabilitative therapies with or without prosthesis) is right for them. This decision making is often confusing and practically and emotionally fraught. It is complicated in four ways: by the numerous beneficial and harmful potential effects of hand transplant or other options, the number of people affected by VCA and the diverse or conflicting positions that they may hold, the practical demands and limitations of the patient's life situation, and the existential significance of limb loss and transplant for the patient's being. Patients need support in working through these treatment determining issues. Evaluation does not provide this support. Shared decision making (SDM) is a method of care that helps patients think, talk, and feel their way through to the right course of action for them. However, traditional models of SDM that focus on weighing possible beneficial and harmful effects of treatments are ill-equipped to tackle the heterogeneous issues of VCA. A recent model, Purposeful SDM extends the range of troubling issues that SDM can help support beyond opposing effects, to include conflicting positions, life situations, and existential being. In this paper we explore the pertinence of these issues in VCA, methods of SDM that each require of clinicians, the benefits of supporting patients with the breadth of issues in their unique problematic situations, implications for outcomes and practice, and extend the theory of the Purposeful SDM model itself based on the issues present in hand transplant decision making.

Indexed as

modelpatient centered carepatient clinician communicationPurposeful SDMshared decision making (SDM)vascularized composite allotransplantationVCA

Identifiers

PMID38993756
PMCPMC11235292

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.