Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

5.2K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
5.2K
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

6.6K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
6.6K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

3.9K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
3.9K
Clinical Trials: Overview01:11

Clinical Trials: Overview

2.5K
Clinical development focuses on how the drug will interact with the human body and encompasses four key phases of clinical trials, each serving a specific purpose in assessing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. These phases overlap and build upon one another. Phase I involves a small group of healthy volunteers (typically 20-80 individuals) or, in cases where significant toxicity is expected, patients with the targeted disease, such as cancer or AIDS. The volunteers are tested for...
2.5K
Clinical Trials01:16

Clinical Trials

6.6K
Clinical trials are prospective experimental studies conducted on humans to determine the safety and efficacy of treatments, drugs, diet methods, and medical devices. Using statistics in clinical trials enables researchers to derive reasonable and accurate conclusions from the collected data, allowing them to make wise decisions in uncertain situations. In medical research, statistical methods are crucial for preventing errors and bias.
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
6.6K
SBAR II: Application of SBAR01:14

SBAR II: Application of SBAR

4.2K
SBAR is an effective communication tool used by healthcare professionals to communicate patient information accurately. SBAR stands for Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation. For a better understanding, an example is given below.
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...
4.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Perioperative Code Status Discussions in Surgical Practice: Results from a National Survey Among Swiss Surgeons.

Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches·2026
Same author

Acute Intermittent Porphyria Mimicking Severe Coprostasis in a Patient on Opioid Maintenance Therapy.

European journal of case reports in internal medicine·2026
Same author

Prostate Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Survival in Switzerland.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

Clinical and Molecular Validation of the Very Favorable IMDC Risk Group in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

Does Checklist-Guided Shared Decision Making Have a Sustained Effect on Code Status Decisions Among Medical Inpatients? Long-Term Follow Up of the Randomized CLEAR Checklist Trial.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same author

Protocol for generating and characterizing Matrigel-free prostate cancer patient-derived organoids.

STAR protocols·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 12, 2025

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
06:28

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy

Published on: August 1, 2019

8.2K

A Randomized Trial of Shared Decision-Making in Code Status Discussions.

Christoph Becker1,2, Sebastian Gross1, Katharina Beck1

  • 1Medical Communication, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

NEJM Evidence
|April 22, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Shared decision-making significantly increased patients choosing do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status and reduced decisional uncertainty. This approach improved patient understanding of outcomes and their preferences for end-of-life care.

More Related Videos

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

6.9K
A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

11.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 12, 2025

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
06:28

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy

Published on: August 1, 2019

8.2K
Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

6.9K
A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

11.7K

Area of Science:

  • Medical Ethics
  • Patient-Centered Care
  • Clinical Decision-Making

Background:

  • The impact of shared decision-making on patient code status preferences is not well understood.
  • Existing care models may not adequately support informed patient choices regarding resuscitation.
  • Evaluating novel approaches is crucial for enhancing end-of-life care discussions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare a shared decision-making approach with usual care for patient code status discussions.
  • To assess the effect of shared decision-making on patients' do-not-resuscitate (DNR) preferences.
  • To evaluate the impact on the quality of decision-making, specifically decisional uncertainty.

Main Methods:

  • A pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial involving 206 residents and 2663 medical patients across six Swiss teaching hospitals.
  • Intervention group received training, a checklist, and decision aid for shared decision-making; control group received usual care.
  • Primary endpoint: patient selection of DNR status. Secondary endpoint: decisional uncertainty via Decisional Conflict Scale.

Main Results:

  • Patients in the shared decision-making group were significantly more likely to choose DNR status (50.0% vs. 37.2%; adjusted RR, 1.37).
  • The intervention group reported significantly lower decisional uncertainty (14.4 vs. 21.8 points on Decisional Conflict Scale).
  • The approach demonstrated a statistically significant influence on code status preferences and decision quality.

Conclusions:

  • Shared decision-making, incorporating discussion of expected outcomes, significantly influences medical patients' code status preferences.
  • This approach leads to a higher preference for do-not-resuscitate status and is associated with reduced decision-making uncertainty.
  • The findings support the integration of structured shared decision-making into end-of-life care planning.