ArticleDer Nervenarzt2006
[Effects of a shared decision making model in psychiatric and neurologic practice].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and testing of a summative video-based e-examination in relation to an OSCE for measuring communication-related factual and procedural knowledge of medical students.GMS journal for medical education · 2021Article
- [Core aspects of a needs-conform care of patients with multiple sclerosis : Utilization of outpatient services and shared decision making].Der Nervenarzt · 2020Review
- [Shared decision-making in acute psychiatric medicine : Contraindication or a challenge?]Der Nervenarzt · 2017Review
- [Adherence to psychopharmacological treatment: Psychotherapeutic strategies to enhance adherence].Der Nervenarzt · 2015Article
- [Documentation in psychiatry and psychotherapy: prerequisites and clinical practice].Der Nervenarzt · 2008Review
- [Timely diagnosis and efficient early-rehabilitation for schizophrenic disorders in the community -- perspectives of a new standard].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Involving patients in medical decisions is increasingly being advocated in medical fields other than psychiatry and neurology. A model of shared decision making might prove to be an ideal way of bridging the gap between patient-centred and evidence-based medicine. This report provides a survey of this shared decision making model and a discussion of its implications in the fields of mental health and neurology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15954015What 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.