Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20091628›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions.

Edward Duncan, Catherine Best, Suzanne Hagen

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03266796 (Shared Decision Making in Physical Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 113 papers, 22 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 22 pooled it
35.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03266796 completednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Shared Decision Making in Physical Therapy: a Cross-sectional Observational Study

TypeobservationalSponsorKlinik ValensRan2017 to 2018Enrolled30ConditionsShared Decision MakingArmsgoal setting process
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

113 citing papers in PubMed, 22 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 256 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  12. Shared Decision Making and Choice for Elective Surgical Care: A Systematic Review.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2016
    Pooled it
  13. Information and decision-making needs among people with mental disorders: a systematic review of the literature.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Shared decision-making behaviours in health professionals: a systematic review of studies based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Edward DuncanNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, The University of Stirling, Iris Murdoch Building, Stirling, Scotland, UK, FK9 4LA.
Catherine Best
Suzanne Hagen
University of Stirling · GBGlasgow Caledonian University · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office NMAHP1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life course. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual, their family and society. Increasingly partnership models of mental health care have been advocated and enshrined in international healthcare policy. Shared decision making is one such partnership approach. Shared decision making is a form of patient-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision. This is advocated on the basis that patients have a right to self-determination and also in the expectation that it will increase treatment adherence.

objectivesTo assess the effects of provider-, consumer- or carer-directed shared decision making interventions for people of all ages with mental health conditions, on a range of outcomes including: patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and health service outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to November 2008), EMBASE (1980 to November 2008), PsycINFO (1967 to November 2008), CINAHL (1982 to November 2008), British Nursing Index and Archive (1985 to November 2008) and SIGLE (1890 to September 2005 (database end date)). We also searched online trial registers and the bibliographies of relevant papers, and contacted authors of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised controlled trials (q-RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs); and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of interventions to increase shared decision making in people with mental health conditions (by DSM or ICD-10 criteria). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on recruitment methods, eligibility criteria, sample characteristics, interventions, outcome measures, participant flow and outcome data from each study were extracted by one author and checked by another. Data are presented in a narrative synthesis. MAIN

resultsWe included two separate German studies involving a total of 518 participants. One study was undertaken in the inpatient treatment of schizophrenia and the other in the treatment of people newly diagnosed with depression in primary care. Regarding the primary outcomes, one study reported statistically significant increases in patient satisfaction, the other study did not. There was no evidence of effect on clinical outcomes or hospital readmission rates in either study. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was an indication that interventions to increase shared decision making increased doctor facilitation of patient involvement in decision making, and did not increase consultation times. Nor did the interventions increase patient compliance with treatment plans. Neither study reported any harms of the intervention. Definite conclusions cannot be drawn, however, on the basis of these two studies. AUTHORS'

conclusionsNo firm conclusions can be drawn at present about the effects of shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions. There is no evidence of harm, but there is an urgent need for further research in this area.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient ParticipationDepressionHumansPatient SatisfactionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID20091628
PMCPMC7209977
OpenAlexW2104315782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.