Communicating About Mortality in Health Decision Support: ‘What and Why and When, and How and Where and Who’
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic has only accelerated the need and desire to deal more openly with mortality, because the effect on survival is central to the comprehensive assessment of harms and benefits needed to meet a 'reasonable patient' legal standard. Taking the view that this requirement is best met through a multi-criterial decision support tool, we offer our preferred answers to the questions of What should be communicated about mortality in the tool, and How, given preferred answers to Who for, Who by, Why, When, and Where. Summary measures, including unrestricted Life Expectancy and Restricted Mean Survival Time are found to be reductionist and relative, and not as easy to understand and communicate as often asserted. Full lifetime absolute survival curves should be presented, even if they cannot be 'evidence-based' beyond trial follow-up limits, along with equivalent measures for other criteria in the (necessarily) multi-criterial decision. A decision support tool should relieve the reasonable person of the resulting calculation burden.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Strategy for Mitigating DKA Risk in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes on Adjunctive Treatment with SGLT Inhibitors: A STICH Protocol
- Glucoraphanin: a broccoli sprout extract that ameliorates obesity-induced inflammation and insulin resistance
- SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure: Targeted Metabolomics and Energetic Metabolism
- Mechanisms of blood pressure reduction with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors
- Sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors: beyond glycaemic control
- Decoding the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiac arrhythmias in heart failure
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.