Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2005
Shared decision making and risk communication in practice: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 6 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of shared decision making training programs for general practitioners.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review.Patient education and counseling · 2012Pooled it
- Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- A systematic review of postcoital bleeding and risk of cervical cancer.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Pooled it
- Trial
- Communicating risk using absolute risk reduction or prolongation of life formats: cluster-randomised trial in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Trial
- Impact of effectiveness information format on patient choice of therapy and satisfaction with decisions about chronic disease medication: the "Influence of intervention Methodologies on Patient Choice of Therapy (IMPACT)" cluster-randomised trial in general practice.BMC health services research · 2013Trial
- Study protocol: improving patient choice in treating low back pain (IMPACT-LBP): a randomised controlled trial of a decision support package for use in physical therapy.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2011Trial
- Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2007Trial
- Absolute cardiovascular disease risk and shared decision making in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.Annals of family medicineTrial
- From knowledge to action: a blended training to enhance shared decision making skills in primary care physicians - a pilot study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploring clinician perspectives on patients with atrial fibrillation who are not prescribed anticoagulation therapy.PEC innovation · 2022Article
- Treatment Preferences in Germany Differ Among Apheresis Patients with Severe Hypercholesterolemia.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Article
- Shared Decision-Making for Nursing Practice: An Integrative Review.The open nursing journal · 2018Review
- "Provoking conversations": case studies of organizations where Option Grid™ decision aids have become 'normalized'.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
- Article
- Chronic pain patients' treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImportant barriers to the wider implementation of shared decision making remain. The experiences of professionals who are skilled in this approach may identify how to overcome these barriers.
aimsTo identify the experiences and views of professionals skilled in shared decision making and risk communication, exploring the opportunities and challenges for implementation. DESIGN OF STUDY: Qualitative study.
settingGwent Health Authority.
methodExit interviews using focus group methodology with 20 GPs who had been in practice between 1 and 10 years, and participated in an explanatory trial lasting 6 months. The trial interventions comprised training in shared decision-making skills and the use of risk communication materials. The doctors consulted with up to 48 patients each (mean = 40, half of them audiotaped) for the study.
resultsThe GPs indicated positive attitudes towards involving patients and described positive effects on their consultations. However, the frequency of applying the new skills and tools was limited outside the trial. Doctors were selective about when they felt greater patient involvement was appropriate and feasible, rather than seeking to apply the approaches to the majority of consultations. They felt they often responded to consumer preferences for low levels of involvement in decision making. Time limitations were important in not implementing the approach more widely.
conclusionThe promotion of 'patient involvement' appears likely to continue. Professionals appear receptive to this, and willing to acquire the relevant skills. Strategies for wider implementation of patient involvement could address how consultations are scheduled in primary care, and raise consumers' expectations or desires for involvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15667759PMC1266236What 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.