ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2003
Exploring doctor and patient views about risk communication and shared decision-making in the consultation.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Perceived susceptibility to chronic kidney disease among high-risk patients seen in primary care practices.Journal of general internal medicine · 2009Trial
- Shared decision making and risk communication in practice: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Trial
- Emicizumab and shared medical decision in patients living with hemophilia A.Hematology, transfusion and cell therapy · 2026Article
- A study on factors influencing decision - making conflicts of proxies of thrombolytic patients with acute ischemic stroke: a network analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Best-Worst Scaling Survey of Inpatients' Preferences in Medical Decision-Making Participation in China.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Computer-Based Decision Tools for Shared Therapeutic Decision-making in Oncology: Systematic Review.JMIR cancer · 2021Review
- In this uncertain world, patient-centred care must not mean patient-led care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Article
- Shared Decision-Making for Nursing Practice: An Integrative Review.The open nursing journal · 2018Review
- Shared Decision-Making in Growth Hormone Therapy-Implications for Patient Care.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2018Review
- Assessment of Decisional Conflict about the Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome, Comparing Patients and Physicians.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2016Article
- Doctors' perspectives on the barriers to appropriate prescribing in older hospitalized patients: a qualitative study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
- The Attitude of Physicians toward the Use of Patient Decision Aids in Iran as a Developing Country.International journal of preventive medicine · 2015Article
- A study comparing the effectiveness of three warning labels on the package of driving-impairing medicines.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2014Article
- The perspectives of Iranian physicians and patients towards patient decision aids: a qualitative study.BMC research notes · 2013Article
- Attitudes toward concordance in psychiatry: a comparative, cross-sectional study of psychiatric patients and mental health professionals.BMC psychiatry · 2012Article
- Communication about children's clinical trials as observed and experienced: qualitative study of parents and practitioners.PloS one · 2011Article
- Variation among internet based calculators in predicting spontaneous resolution of vesicoureteral reflux.The Journal of urology · 2010Article
- Patient factors in the implementation of decision aids in general practice: a qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere have been significant conceptual developments regarding shared decision-making (SDM) and assessments of people's hypothetical preferences for involvement in treatment or care decisions. There are few data on the perceptions of patients and professionals about SDM in actual practice.
objectiveTo explore, from paired doctor-patient interviews, participants' perceptions of SDM in the consultation and the level of consensus between the participants in the consultation process.
designQualitative analysis of semi-structured interview data. SETTING AND
participantsTwenty general practitioners received training packages in 'risk communication' (RC) and 'SDM' to use as tools within the consultation. Forty patients with one of four conditions, for which a range of treatment options is available, were selected. Patient/doctor pairs were interviewed separately following consultations at four stages -'baseline' [general practitioner's (GP) usual consultation style], SDM training, RC alone, and both RC and SDM training. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using NVivo software.
resultsRisk communication interventions by doctors appeared to result in a greater perception of decisions being made in the consultation. High levels of satisfaction with consultations were evident before application of the interventions and did not change after the interventions. Doctors' and patients' perceptions of the consultations were highly congruent at all phases of the study.
conclusionShared decision-making and RC approaches were helpful in selected consultations and showed no detrimental effects to patients. However, the use of RC and SDM made only small differences to decision-making in consultations within the population studied. Increasing patient participation may be seen as more ethically justifiable than the traditional paternalistic approach but this needs to be set against the additional training costs incurred.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.