Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21786152›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2012

Person centred care and shared decision making: implications for ethics, public health and research.

Christian Munthe, Lars Sandman, Daniela Cutas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A Joanna Briggs Institute Framework Approach to Shared Decision Making in End-of-Life.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Shared Decision Making in Psychiatry: Dissolving the Responsibility Problem.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christian MuntheDepartment of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, The University of Gothenburg Center for Person Centered Care, Gothenburg, Sweden. Christian.munthe@gu.se
Lars Sandman
Daniela Cutas

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic account of ethical issues actualised in different areas, as well as at different levels and stages of health care, by introducing organisational and other procedures that embody a shift towards person centred care and shared decision-making (PCC/SDM). The analysis builds on general ethical theory and earlier work on aspects of PCC/SDM relevant from an ethics perspective. This account leads up to a number of theoretical as well as empirical and practice oriented issues that, in view of broad advancements towards PCC/SDM, need to be considered by health care ethics researchers. Given a PCC/SDM-based reorientation of health care practice, such ethics research is essential from a quality assurance perspective.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEthical TheoryHumansPatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationPublic HealthResearchSelf Care

Identifiers

PMID21786152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.