Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death
Background Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Se...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 79 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 69 |
container_title | Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Carroll, Sandra L. Strachan, Patricia H. de Laat, Sonya Schwartz, Lisa Arthur, Heather M. |
description | Background Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD.
Design/Setting A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested.
Findings Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state.
Conclusions Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3380066</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1315612698</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks-K1TAUxoMozjj6ChJw4-bW_GnTFESQYXSEAV0ouAtpcjqTa5tck_Q6s3PrI_h6Pomp93pRN05pSeD8vi8npx9CmJKKlufZuqJcdKtWsKZihNKKkJbw6voOOj4U7u73oqH8CD1IaU0Ibbls76MjRkXd0I4co2_vdHbgc_rx9Tu2YFxyweNJf3L-EueAtTGwyTjEpTg6D1h77KbNqH3W_QjY6Ghd2ELMsDCD66MbR52LYijfJrpJx5uywrYcs5iHAafZWvA7rTZFpvPVQ3Rv0GOCR_v1BH14dfb-9Hx18fb1m9OXFyvTiJaveE246bserBTMMs3IQGV5Jegaemtp31hGWc1qbTsxCMGEbGsqObXAOjLwE_Ri57uZ-wmsKV1FPap9oypop_6ueHelLsNWcS4JEaIYPN0bxPB5hpTV5JKBcmkPYU6qTL1uRc07eguUNoIy0cn_o0w2RHLSsoI--Qddhzn6MjTFiSj_nvBmoeSOMjGkFGE4XJEStaRIrZdWO7WERS0pUr9SpK6L9PGfIzoIf8emAM93wBc3ws2tjdX52cey4T8Bx4DYjQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3067620352</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><creator>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD.
Design/Setting A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested.
Findings Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state.
Conclusions Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-6513</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1369-7625</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21645190</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HEHPFM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Alternative medicine ; Candidates ; Cardiac arrhythmia ; Cardiology ; cardiovascular ; Cardiovascular diseases ; Coronary artery disease ; Death ; Death & dying ; Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control ; Decision Making ; Defibrillators ; Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology ; Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization ; Female ; Grounded theory ; Health care ; Health Status ; Heart diseases ; Heart failure ; Higher education ; Humans ; implantable defibrillator ; Implants ; Influence ; Interviews ; Interviews as Topic ; Ischemia ; Male ; Medical personnel ; Medicine ; Middle Aged ; Motivation ; Original Research Papers ; Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology ; patient decision making ; Patient Preference - psychology ; patient values ; Patients ; Prevention ; primary prevention ; Qualitative research ; Risk acceptance ; Risk communication ; Risk Factors ; Secondary education ; Social sciences ; sudden cardiac death ; Sudden death ; Task forces ; Thoracic surgery ; Trust ; Women</subject><ispartof>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79</ispartof><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</rights><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.</rights><rights>2013. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3380066/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3380066/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,30999,31000,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1369-7625.2011.00703.x$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21645190$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strachan, Patricia H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Laat, Sonya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><title>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</title><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><description>Background Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD.
Design/Setting A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested.
Findings Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state.
Conclusions Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Alternative medicine</subject><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>cardiovascular</subject><subject>Cardiovascular diseases</subject><subject>Coronary artery disease</subject><subject>Death</subject><subject>Death & dying</subject><subject>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Defibrillators</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Grounded theory</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Heart diseases</subject><subject>Heart failure</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>implantable defibrillator</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Original Research Papers</subject><subject>Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology</subject><subject>patient decision making</subject><subject>Patient Preference - psychology</subject><subject>patient values</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>primary prevention</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Risk acceptance</subject><subject>Risk communication</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Secondary education</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>sudden cardiac death</subject><subject>Sudden death</subject><subject>Task forces</subject><subject>Thoracic surgery</subject><subject>Trust</subject><subject>Women</subject><issn>1369-6513</issn><issn>1369-7625</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks-K1TAUxoMozjj6ChJw4-bW_GnTFESQYXSEAV0ouAtpcjqTa5tck_Q6s3PrI_h6Pomp93pRN05pSeD8vi8npx9CmJKKlufZuqJcdKtWsKZihNKKkJbw6voOOj4U7u73oqH8CD1IaU0Ibbls76MjRkXd0I4co2_vdHbgc_rx9Tu2YFxyweNJf3L-EueAtTGwyTjEpTg6D1h77KbNqH3W_QjY6Ghd2ELMsDCD66MbR52LYijfJrpJx5uywrYcs5iHAafZWvA7rTZFpvPVQ3Rv0GOCR_v1BH14dfb-9Hx18fb1m9OXFyvTiJaveE246bserBTMMs3IQGV5Jegaemtp31hGWc1qbTsxCMGEbGsqObXAOjLwE_Ri57uZ-wmsKV1FPap9oypop_6ueHelLsNWcS4JEaIYPN0bxPB5hpTV5JKBcmkPYU6qTL1uRc07eguUNoIy0cn_o0w2RHLSsoI--Qddhzn6MjTFiSj_nvBmoeSOMjGkFGE4XJEStaRIrZdWO7WERS0pUr9SpK6L9PGfIzoIf8emAM93wBc3ws2tjdX52cey4T8Bx4DYjQ</recordid><startdate>201303</startdate><enddate>201303</enddate><creator>Carroll, Sandra L.</creator><creator>Strachan, Patricia H.</creator><creator>de Laat, Sonya</creator><creator>Schwartz, Lisa</creator><creator>Arthur, Heather M.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201303</creationdate><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><author>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Alternative medicine</topic><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Cardiac arrhythmia</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>cardiovascular</topic><topic>Cardiovascular diseases</topic><topic>Coronary artery disease</topic><topic>Death</topic><topic>Death & dying</topic><topic>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Defibrillators</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Grounded theory</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Heart diseases</topic><topic>Heart failure</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>implantable defibrillator</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Original Research Papers</topic><topic>Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology</topic><topic>patient decision making</topic><topic>Patient Preference - psychology</topic><topic>patient values</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>primary prevention</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Risk acceptance</topic><topic>Risk communication</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Secondary education</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>sudden cardiac death</topic><topic>Sudden death</topic><topic>Task forces</topic><topic>Thoracic surgery</topic><topic>Trust</topic><topic>Women</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strachan, Patricia H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Laat, Sonya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carroll, Sandra L.</au><au>Strachan, Patricia H.</au><au>de Laat, Sonya</au><au>Schwartz, Lisa</au><au>Arthur, Heather M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</atitle><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><date>2013-03</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>69</spage><epage>79</epage><pages>69-79</pages><issn>1369-6513</issn><eissn>1369-7625</eissn><coden>HEHPFM</coden><abstract>Background Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD.
Design/Setting A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested.
Findings Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state.
Conclusions Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>21645190</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 1369-6513 |
ispartof | Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79 |
issn | 1369-6513 1369-7625 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3380066 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Alternative medicine Candidates Cardiac arrhythmia Cardiology cardiovascular Cardiovascular diseases Coronary artery disease Death Death & dying Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control Decision Making Defibrillators Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization Female Grounded theory Health care Health Status Heart diseases Heart failure Higher education Humans implantable defibrillator Implants Influence Interviews Interviews as Topic Ischemia Male Medical personnel Medicine Middle Aged Motivation Original Research Papers Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology patient decision making Patient Preference - psychology patient values Patients Prevention primary prevention Qualitative research Risk acceptance Risk communication Risk Factors Secondary education Social sciences sudden cardiac death Sudden death Task forces Thoracic surgery Trust Women |
title | Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T08%3A43%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patients%E2%80%99%20decision%20making%20to%20accept%20or%20decline%20an%20implantable%20cardioverter%20defibrillator%20for%20primary%20prevention%20of%20sudden%20cardiac%20death&rft.jtitle=Health%20expectations%20:%20an%20international%20journal%20of%20public%20participation%20in%20health%20care%20and%20health%20policy&rft.au=Carroll,%20Sandra%20L.&rft.date=2013-03&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=79&rft.pages=69-79&rft.issn=1369-6513&rft.eissn=1369-7625&rft.coden=HEHPFM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E1315612698%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3067620352&rft_id=info:pmid/21645190&rfr_iscdi=true |