Musculoskeletal DiseasesNCT05401981
Disjunction Between Patient Narrative and Formulaic Thinking in the Doctor
A study testing Story checklist in people with Musculoskeletal Diseases, run by University of Texas at Austin at 5 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This study is seeking whether giving or not giving a clinician a card with talking points in the form of a checklist about the patient's story affects the patients care experience or not Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 89 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Musculoskeletal Diseases
- What is being tested?
- Story checklist
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 5 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2026to 1 Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 89 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- New patients
- Orthopedic visit
Who cannot join
- Languages other than English or Spanish.
- Cognitive dysfunction precluding completion of questionnaires.
Trial locations and contacts
5 sites in 1 country.
5 sites in 1 country
United States5 sites
Austin Regional Clinic
Austin, Texas, 78705
Texas Orthopedics
Austin, Texas, 78705
HTB Musculoskeletal Institute
Austin, Texas, 78712
Orthopedic Specialists of Austin
Austin, Texas, 78751
ATX Ortho
Austin, Texas, 78756
About this study
This study is seeking whether giving or not giving a clinician a card with talking points in the form of a checklist about the patient's story affects the patients care experience or not
Read the detailed description
During an office visit, the clinician and the patient engage in dialogue and begin a relationship. This traditionally starts with the patient telling their story, which conveys why they decided to seek care. This study will determine the influence of a checklist specifically about the patient's narrative. The checklist will be used during the interview portion of the visit, to remind the clinician to stay curious about the person before them, their experience of the illness, and their explanatory model, and to help ensure that empathic opportunities are not missed.
- Conditions
- Musculoskeletal Diseases
- Being tested
- Story checklist
- Keywords
- Orthopedics
- Medical subject headings
- Musculoskeletal Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Story checklistOther
The story checklist consists of a couple of questions that gives the physician something to keep in mind while visiting the patients.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Standard care | No intervention | Clinician not given any cards about the patient's story. |
| Story checklist | Experimental | Clinician given a card with talking points in the form of a checklist about the patient's story. Receives: Other: Story checklist |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patient Experience Measure questions
Questionnaire assessing patient's experience
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Secondary outcomes (5)
Perceived empathy (JSPPPE)
Patient perceived of physician empathy as measured by the JSPPPE;The scores range from 1 ("Strongly Disagree") to 7 ("Strongly Agree"), with the total score being between 5 and 35. Higher scores represent greater empathic perception about the physician.
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Guttman
Patient Satisfaction as measured by the Guttman Scale, The total score is between 0 and 7, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction.
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Guttman CEQ
Communication Effectiveness Questionnaire; The total score is the sum of all item scores (9 to 63) with higher scores representing a greater degree of perceived communication effectiveness.
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
PROMIS PF CAT
Patient Physical Function is measure by the PROMIS PF CAT; Higher scores indicate better physical function, with a mean of 50 for the general US population
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
NRS pain intensity assessment
Numeric rating scale = 11 point ordinal scale, the higher score indicates the more pain intensity
Measured: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Jun 2022
- Study start1 Jan 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
Why it stopped: Deemed not feasible.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Musculoskeletal DiseasesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Texas at AustinThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Parallel Assignment
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Texas at Austin
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, David Ring, University of Texas at Austin
- Investigators
- David Ring, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, The University of Texas at Austin
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05401981
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2020-01-0115
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 11 May 2022
- Last updated
- 31 Jul 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Jul 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Disjunction Between Patient Narrative and Formulaic Thinking in the Doctor
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05401981
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2020-01-0115
- Conditions
- Musculoskeletal Diseases
- Keywords
- Orthopedics
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: Deemed not feasible.
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Texas at AustinUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 2 Jun 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is seeking whether giving or not giving a clinician a card with talking points in the form of a checklist about the patient's story affects the patients care experience or not
Detailed description
During an office visit, the clinician and the patient engage in dialogue and begin a relationship. This traditionally starts with the patient telling their story, which conveys why they decided to seek care. This study will determine the influence of a checklist specifically about the patient's narrative. The checklist will be used during the interview portion of the visit, to remind the clinician to stay curious about the person before them, their experience of the illness, and their explanatory model, and to help ensure that empathic opportunities are not missed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Parallel Assignment
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Standard care | No intervention | –Clinician not given any cards about the patient's story. |
| Story checklist | Experimental | Other: Story checklistClinician given a card with talking points in the form of a checklist about the patient's story. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 89 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- New patients
- Orthopedic visit
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Languages other than English or Spanish.
- Cognitive dysfunction precluding completion of questionnaires.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Story checklistThe story checklist consists of a couple of questions that gives the physician something to keep in mind while visiting the patients. | Other | Story checklist |
Primary outcome
Patient Experience Measure questions
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Questionnaire assessing patient's experience
5 secondary outcomes
Perceived empathy (JSPPPE)
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Guttman
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Guttman CEQ
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
PROMIS PF CAT
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
NRS pain intensity assessment
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 Jul 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Musculoskeletal Diseases
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Extension Study of Safety and Tolerability of DDY391 in Participants With Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis (CDDY391A12201-extension)
Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of PTC844 in Participants With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis
Rheumatoid Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A First-in-human Study of KK8123 in Adults With X-linked Hypophosphatemia
X-linked Hypophosphatemia
Recruiting
Effects of Cervicothoracic Mobilization in Patients With Supraspinatus Tendinitis
Rotator Cuff Tendonitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
An Ascending Dose Study of DKB903 in Participants With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Participants With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
David Ring, MD, PhD principal investigator
The University of Texas at Austin
5 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Story checklist in people with Musculoskeletal Diseases, run by University of Texas at Austin at 5 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Jul 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 5 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Patient Experience Measure questions (time frame: through study completion, an average of 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Jul 2025.