{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,23]],"date-time":"2026-02-23T22:19:03Z","timestamp":1771885143490,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":39,"publisher":"American Medical Association (AMA)","issue":"3","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JAMA Netw Open"],"abstract":"Importance<\/jats:title>Shared decision-making (SDM) can be made difficult by the multifaceted nature of outcome assessment. A rigorous method for analyzing results from multiple outcomes is called generalized pairwise comparisons (GPC), which could assist in SDM.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Objective<\/jats:title>To examine whether GPC can be useful in SDM by using individual-patient data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Design, Setting, and Participants<\/jats:title>This comparative effectiveness study used data from participants in the multicenter US CODA trial (conducted between May 2016 and March 2020). All possible pairs of patients (one from each arm) were formed to analyze each of 7 outcomes of interest sequentially. Data were analyzed between February 2020 and early 2024.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Exposures<\/jats:title>Three scenarios of priorities related to a different order of outcomes were considered. The first scenario came from a consensus exercise with patients that favored antibiotics, whereas the other 2 were arbitrarily chosen to illustrate the range of possible outcomes depending on prioritizations. Scenario 2 favored neither treatment, and scenario 3 favored appendectomy.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Main Outcomes and Measures<\/jats:title>The primary outcome was the net treatment benefit (NTB), a formal measure of benefit-risk, which is the net probability that a randomly selected patient from the antibiotic-assigned arm would have a more favorable outcome than a randomly selected patient from the appendectomy-assigned arm.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Results<\/jats:title>A total of 1552 patients were included in the CODA trial, with 776 (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [13.4] years; 286 [37%] female) in the antibiotic arm and 776 (mean [SD] age, 37.8 [13.7] years; 290 [37%] female) in the appendectomy arm. The NTB of antibiotic treatment was 12.8% (95% CI, 7.1% to 18.3%; P<\/jats:italic>\u2009&amp;lt;\u2009.001) for the first scenario, 3.2% (95% CI \u22122.4% to 8.7%; P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u2009.27) for the second, and \u221214.5% (95% CI. \u221220.2% to \u22128.8%; P<\/jats:italic>\u2009&amp;lt;\u2009.001) for the third. These results respectively favored antibiotics, neither treatment, or appendectomy, thus illustrating that benefit-risk varies considerably according to individual priorities.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Conclusions and Relevance<\/jats:title>This comparative effectiveness study of antibiotics and appendectomy illustrates that the GPC method is a flexible yet mathematically rigorous quantitative analysis of benefit-risk balance. This method provides a more exhaustive and nuanced quantitative assessment of the differences between 2 treatment modalities in terms of prioritized outcomes. Furthermore, GPC could support SDM by considering individual prioritizations of the multiple outcomes.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2025.2484","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,31]],"date-time":"2025-03-31T15:48:50Z","timestamp":1743436130000},"page":"e252484","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Generalized Pairwise Comparisons to Support Shared Decision-Making in the CODA Trial"],"prefix":"10.1001","volume":"8","author":[{"given":"Samuel","family":"Salvaggio","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"One2Treat, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sarah E.","family":"Monsell","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Washington, Seattle"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Patrick J.","family":"Heagerty","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Washington, Seattle"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Mickael","family":"De Backer","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"One2Treat, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Emilie","family":"Barr\u00e9","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"One2Treat, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Jean-Christophe","family":"Chiem","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"One2Treat, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Everardo D.","family":"Saad","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"IDDI (International Drug Development Institute), Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Marc","family":"Buyse","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"One2Treat, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"},{"name":"IDDI (International Drug Development Institute), Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium"},{"name":"I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"David R.","family":"Flum","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Washington, Seattle"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"10","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,31]]},"reference":[{"issue":"10","key":"zoi250140r1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1361","DOI":"10.1007\/s11606-012-2077-6","article-title":"Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice.","volume":"27","author":"Elwyn","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Gen Intern Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"zoi250140r2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"34","DOI":"10.1136\/heartjnl-2022-321050","article-title":"Shared decision making in cardiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","volume":"109","author":"Mitropoulou","year":"2022","journal-title":"Heart"},{"issue":"6","key":"zoi250140r3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"667","DOI":"10.1007\/s40271-020-00443-6","article-title":"Shared decision making in surgery: a meta-analysis of existing literature.","volume":"13","author":"Niburski","year":"2020","journal-title":"Patient"},{"issue":"5","key":"zoi250140r4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1241","DOI":"10.1111\/hex.13105","article-title":"Shared decision making in surgery: a scoping review of the literature.","volume":"23","author":"Niburski","year":"2020","journal-title":"Health Expect"},{"issue":"7","key":"zoi250140r5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"729","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X211035681","article-title":"The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration: evidence update 2.0.","volume":"41","author":"Stacey","year":"2021","journal-title":"Med Decis Making"},{"key":"zoi250140r6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"g7624","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.g7624","article-title":"Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens.","volume":"350","author":"Agoritsas","year":"2015","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"4","key":"zoi250140r7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AS9.0000000000000213","article-title":"Randomized pilot test of a decision support tool for acute appendicitis: decisional conflict and acceptability in a healthy population.","volume":"3","author":"Rosen","year":"2022","journal-title":"Ann Surg Open"},{"issue":"7","key":"zoi250140r8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1324","DOI":"10.1016\/j.drudis.2019.05.001","article-title":"Methods for exploring and eliciting patient preferences in the medical product lifecycle: a literature review.","volume":"24","author":"Soekhai","year":"2019","journal-title":"Drug Discov Today"},{"issue":"1","key":"zoi250140r9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2015.12.003","article-title":"Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making\u2013an introduction: report 1 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force.","volume":"19","author":"Thokala","year":"2016","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"30","key":"zoi250140r11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3245","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.3923","article-title":"Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two-sample problem.","volume":"29","author":"Buyse","year":"2010","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"5","key":"zoi250140r12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"800","DOI":"10.1093\/cid\/civ495","article-title":"Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) and response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (RADAR).","volume":"61","author":"Evans","year":"2015","journal-title":"Clin Infect Dis"},{"issue":"2","key":"zoi250140r13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"176","DOI":"10.1093\/eurheartj\/ehr352","article-title":"The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities.","volume":"33","author":"Pocock","year":"2012","journal-title":"Eur Heart J"},{"issue":"20","key":"zoi250140r14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1546","DOI":"10.1161\/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067786","article-title":"Win ratio: a seductive but potentially misleading method for evaluating evidence from clinical trials.","volume":"149","author":"Butler","year":"2024","journal-title":"Circulation"},{"key":"zoi250140r15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"148","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2021.03.018","article-title":"The net benefit of a treatment should take the correlation between benefits and harms into account.","volume":"137","author":"Buyse","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"11","key":"zoi250140r16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1007","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1805689","article-title":"Tafamidis treatment for patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy.","volume":"379","author":"Maurer","year":"2018","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"3","key":"zoi250140r17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"568","DOI":"10.1038\/s41591-021-01659-1","article-title":"The SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure: a multinational randomized trial.","volume":"28","author":"Voors","year":"2022","journal-title":"Nat Med"},{"issue":"10","key":"zoi250140r18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1918","DOI":"10.1002\/ejhf.2663","article-title":"Sacubitril\/valsartan versus ramipril for patients with acute myocardial infarction: win-ratio analysis of the PARADISE-MI trial.","volume":"24","author":"Berwanger","year":"2022","journal-title":"Eur J Heart Fail"},{"issue":"11","key":"zoi250140r19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1341","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1097-0258(19990615)18:11<1341::AID-SIM129>3.0.CO;2-7","article-title":"Combining mortality and longitudinal measures in clinical trials.","volume":"18","author":"Finkelstein","year":"1999","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"5","key":"zoi250140r20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"615","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X14526305","article-title":"Communicating relative risk changes with baseline risk: presentation format and numeracy matter.","volume":"34","author":"Bodemer","year":"2014","journal-title":"Med Decis Making"},{"issue":"11","key":"zoi250140r21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1186","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djz030","article-title":"Assessing long-term survival benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitors using the net survival benefit.","volume":"111","author":"P\u00e9ron","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"7","key":"zoi250140r22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"901","DOI":"10.1001\/jamaoncol.2015.6359","article-title":"The net chance of a longer survival as a patient-oriented measure of treatment benefit in randomized clinical trials.","volume":"2","author":"P\u00e9ron","year":"2016","journal-title":"JAMA Oncol"},{"issue":"1","key":"zoi250140r23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"321","DOI":"10.1186\/s13023-023-02943-8","article-title":"Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes are a powerful and patient-centric analysis of multi-domain scores.","volume":"18","author":"Deltuvaite-Thomas","year":"2023","journal-title":"Orphanet J Rare Dis"},{"issue":"4","key":"zoi250140r24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"729","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jpedsurg.2022.10.009","article-title":"Shared decision-making in pediatric surgery: an overview of its application for the treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis.","volume":"58","author":"Patterson","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Pediatr Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"zoi250140r25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"656","DOI":"10.1002\/bjs.10147","article-title":"Meta-analysis of antibiotics versus appendicectomy for non-perforated acute appendicitis.","volume":"103","author":"Sallinen","year":"2016","journal-title":"Br J Surg"},{"issue":"20","key":"zoi250140r26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1907","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa2014320","article-title":"A randomized trial comparing antibiotics with appendectomy for appendicitis.","volume":"383","author":"Flum","year":"2020","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"4","key":"zoi250140r27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1093\/bjsopen\/zrac100","article-title":"Randomized clinical trials comparing antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis.","volume":"6","author":"Herrod","year":"2022","journal-title":"BJS Open"},{"key":"zoi250140r28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"218","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jss.2022.06.011","article-title":"Implementing nonoperative treatment strategy for simple pediatric appendicitis: a qualitative study.","volume":"279","author":"Knaapen","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Surg Res"},{"issue":"5","key":"zoi250140r29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"471","DOI":"10.1001\/jamasurg.2017.5310","article-title":"Patient preferences for surgery or antibiotics for the treatment of acute appendicitis.","volume":"153","author":"Hanson","year":"2018","journal-title":"JAMA Surg"},{"issue":"3","key":"zoi250140r30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"199","DOI":"10.1016\/0168-8510(90)90421-9","article-title":"EuroQol\u2014a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.","volume":"16","author":"EuroQol Group","year":"1990","journal-title":"Health Policy"},{"key":"zoi250140r31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"59","DOI":"10.1186\/1477-7525-11-59","article-title":"Minimal clinically important differences for the EQ-5D and QWB-SA in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): results from a doubly randomized preference trial (DRPT).","volume":"11","author":"Le","year":"2013","journal-title":"Health Qual Life Outcomes"},{"issue":"1","key":"zoi250140r33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"178","DOI":"10.1093\/biostatistics\/kxv032","article-title":"Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components.","volume":"17","author":"Bebu","year":"2016","journal-title":"Biostatistics"},{"issue":"20","key":"zoi250140r34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2923","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.7799","article-title":"Causal estimands and confidence intervals associated with Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests in randomized experiments.","volume":"37","author":"Fay","year":"2018","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"11","key":"zoi250140r36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e361","DOI":"10.1093\/bjs\/znab280","article-title":"Willingness to undergo antibiotic treatment of acute appendicitis based on risk of treatment failure.","volume":"108","author":"Rosen","year":"2021","journal-title":"Br J Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"zoi250140r37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"940","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jval.2012.05.004","article-title":"Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons: a new tool for timely comparative effectiveness research.","volume":"15","author":"Signorovitch","year":"2012","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"6","key":"zoi250140r38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2019.5009","article-title":"Effects of a patient activation tool on decision making between surgery and nonoperative management for pediatric appendicitis: a randomized clinical trial.","volume":"2","author":"Minneci","year":"2019","journal-title":"JAMA Netw Open"},{"issue":"4","key":"zoi250140r39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e766","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000005255","article-title":"Verbal descriptions of the probability of treatment complications lead to high variability in risk perceptions: a survey study.","volume":"277","author":"Rosen","year":"2023","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"zoi250140r35","volume-title":"Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking","author":"Gladwell","year":"2005"},{"key":"zoi250140r10","unstructured":"Dodgson? JS. Multi-criteria analysis: a manual. Department for Communities and Local Government. January 2009. Accessed December 24, 2024. https:\/\/assets.publishing.service.gov.uk\/media\/5a790545e5274a2acd18b975\/1132618.pdf"},{"key":"zoi250140r32","unstructured":"Appendicitis treatment options. Accessed February 19, 2025. https:\/\/appyornot.org\/"}],"container-title":["JAMA Network Open"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/jamanetwork.com\/journals\/jamanetworkopen\/articlepdf\/2831949\/salvaggio_2025_oi_250140_1742414612.79658.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,31]],"date-time":"2025-03-31T15:49:48Z","timestamp":1743436188000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/jamanetwork.com\/journals\/jamanetworkopen\/fullarticle\/2831949"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,31]]},"references-count":39,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,3]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2025.2484","relation":{},"ISSN":["2574-3805"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2574-3805","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,31]]}}}