ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2011
Shared decision making: trade-offs between narrower and broader conceptions.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Availability and readability of patient education materials for deprescribing: An environmental scan.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Pooled it
- Congruence between patients' preferred and perceived participation in medical decision-making: a review of the literature.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2014Pooled it
- Option Grids to facilitate shared decision making for patients with Osteoarthritis of the knee: protocol for a single site, efficacy trial.BMC health services research · 2014Trial
- Choosing how to decide: empowering patients for shared decision-making in end-of-life care.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Staying Connected? Revaluing 'Relationship Goods' in Digital Health Ecologies.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Brain-Hype and For-Profit Medical Devices.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Communicative Rationality and Clinical Decision-Making: A Habermasian Perspective on the Doctor-Patient Relationship.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Review
- Prioritizing Equity in Design and Implementation of Consumer-Facing Digital Resources to Support Engagement and Shared Decision-Making.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- 'Bridging the gap': exploring shared decision-making with autistic young people within an NHS Learning Disability and Autism Keyworker Programme in England.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- How Is Psychotropic Use for Challenging Behaviour in People With Intellectual Disability Understood by Stakeholders? A Concept Analysis Using Rodgers' Evolutionary Approach.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Article
- Article
- A Quantitative Study Exploring and Comparing Key Factors in Medication Management in the Irish Healthcare Setting.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Minimum levels of interpretability for artificial moral agents.AI and ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- Physician-reported characteristics, representations, and ethical justifications of shared decision-making practices in the care of paediatric patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Polish Medical Doctors' Opinions on Available Resources and Information Campaigns concerning Antibiotics and Antibiotic Resistance, a Cross-Sectional Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Asking the right questions: towards a person-centered conception of shared decision-making regarding treatment of advanced chronic kidney disease in older patients.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Talking it better: conversations and normative complexity in healthcare improvement.Medical humanities · 2022Article
- Views of healthcare consumer representatives on defensive practice: 'We are your biggest advocate and supporter… not the enemy'.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Grounded theory qualitative approach from Foucault's ethical perspective: Deconstruction of patient self-determination in the clinical setting.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Shared decision-making approaches, by recognizing the autonomy and responsibility of both health professionals and patients, aim for an ethical 'middle way' between 'paternalistic' and 'consumerist' models of clinical decision making. Shared decision making has been understood in various ways. In this paper, we distinguish narrow and broader conceptions of shared decision making and explore their relative strengths and weaknesses. In the first part of the paper, we construct a summary characterization of an archetypal narrow conception of shared decision making (a conception that does not coincide with any specific published model but which reflects features of a variety of models). We show the shortcomings of such a conception and highlight the need to broaden out our thinking about shared decision making if the ethical (and instrumental) goals of shared decision making are to be realized. In the second part of the paper, we acknowledge and explore the advantages and disadvantages of operating with broader conceptions of shared decision making by considering the analogies between health professional-patient relationships and familiar examples of 'open-ended' relationships (e.g. friendships). We conclude by arguing that the illustrated 'trade-offs' between narrow conceptions (which may protect patients from inappropriately paternalistic professionals but preclude important forms of professional support) and broad conceptions (which render more forms of professional support legitimate but may require skills or virtues that not all health professionals possess) suggest the need to find ways, in principle and in practice, of taking seriously both patient autonomy and autonomy-supportive professional intervention.
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.