Why the study?
Does the elicitation method (ping-ponging vs starting at known efficacy) affect the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for warfarin therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Population
64 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were initiated with warfarin therapy at least 3 months…
Comparison
Ping-ponging elicitation method to determine the… vs Starting at the known efficacy elicitation method.
Design
RCT, Randomized to receive 1 of 2 elicitation methods for each interview.
Follow-up
2 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Patient-derived MCIDs for warfarin in AF are smaller than expert estimates and sensitive to elicitation method; extends evidence for incorporating patient preferences in benefit-risk assessments.
Does the elicitation method (ping-ponging vs starting at known efficacy) affect the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for warfarin therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation accept warfarin therapy for a much smaller absolute reduction in stroke risk than often assumed by experts, and the elicitation method significantly affects the derived MCID.
Malcolm Man‐Son‐Hing (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: