Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=831 Randomized Double-blind Health Services Research

Understanding Factors in Decision Making for Children With Medical Complexity

Multiple Chronic Conditions · Children With Medical Complexity

Enrolled (actual)
831
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Feb 2026
Primary outcome: Primary: Decision Readiness — 77.3; 79.1; 79.1; 78.5 score on a scale

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Ambiguity (Behavioral); Complexity (Behavioral); Normalizing language (Behavioral); Narrative (Behavioral)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
University of Utah
Primary completion
Aug 2024

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Decision Readiness
77.3; 79.1; 79.1; 78.5; 82.3; 80.5
SECONDARY
Decisional Conflict Scale
30.7; 36.5; 32.9; 28.1; 26.0; 31.3
SECONDARY
Decision Intent for Treatment
7; 9; 9; 8; 5; 10
SECONDARY
Knowledge
0.9; 0.8; 0.8; 0.8; 0.8; 0.8

Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare different strategies to communicate around potential risks and benefits related to treatment decision making in parents/adult caregivers of children with medical complexity. The objective of this study is to identify the most effective ways to communicate decision-related risks and benefits to improve the quality of caregiver decision making for children with medical complexity. Participants will view a video of a simulated clinic visit and related medical information and complete a survey about their experiences. Researchers will compare participant survey responses to see if decision quality changes based on the information reviewed by the participant.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Adult caregiver of a child with medical complexity
  • English- or Spanish-speaking

Exclusion Criteria

  • Child is diagnosed with neuromuscular scoliosis but has not yet made a decision about whether to undergo spinal fusion.
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05913206). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search