Trial reportPloS one2011
Patients' and observers' perceptions of involvement differ. Validation study on inter-relating measures for shared decision making.
Trial report in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 8 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
71 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of observational coding systems to assess patient-healthcare professional interactions.Patient education and counseling · 2025Pooled it
- Measuring shared decision making in oncology: Development and first testing of the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician questionnaires.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Pooled it
- Systematic review of shared decision-making in surgery.The British journal of surgery · 2018Pooled it
- Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- The quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision making: A systematic review.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- How to routinely collect data on patient-reported outcome and experience measures in renal registries in Europe: an expert consensus meeting.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2015Pooled it
- Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Pooled it
- Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2015Pooled it
- The effect of shared decision-making on recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain in primary care; a post-hoc analysis from the patient, physician and observer perspectives.BMC primary care · 2022Trial
- Informed shared decision-making programme for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2018 · on this mapTrial
- Shared Decision Making and the Use of Decision Aids.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2015Trial
- An informed shared decision making programme on the prevention of myocardial infarction for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care: protocol of a cluster randomised, controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2015Trial
- Shared decision making in type 2 diabetes with a support decision tool that takes into account clinical factors, the intensity of treatment and patient preferences: design of a cluster randomised (OPTIMAL) trial.BMC family practice · 2015Trial
- Shared Decision-Making and Patient Enablement in Outpatient Rehabilitation: An Observational Study.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Observational
- Nurse-led care model to overcome migration-related language barriers in people with cancer (BMJ open · 2026Article
- Scoping review of instruments measuring organizational context in implementation studies within healthcare.Health research policy and systems · 2026Review
- Shared decision-making and medication adherence among community adults with chronic diseases: a cross-sectional study in Hubei Province, China.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Shared decision-making in depression: From a generalized ethical imperative to a personalized approach? A narrative review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026Review
- From knowledge to action: a blended training to enhance shared decision making skills in primary care physicians - a pilot study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Communication competences of multiple sclerosis neurologists during advance care planning conversations: A multi-observer study.PloS one · 2026Article
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatient involvement into medical decisions as conceived in the shared decision making method (SDM) is essential in evidence based medicine. However, it is not conclusively evident how best to define, realize and evaluate involvement to enable patients making informed choices. We aimed at investigating the ability of four measures to indicate patient involvement. While use and reporting of these instruments might imply wide overlap regarding the addressed constructs this assumption seems questionable with respect to the diversity of the perspectives from which the assessments are administered.
methodsThe study investigated a nested cohort (N = 79) of a randomized trial evaluating a patient decision aid on immunotherapy for multiple sclerosis. Convergent validities were calculated between observer ratings of videotaped physician-patient consultations (OPTION) and patients' perceptions of the communication (Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, Control Preference Scale & Decisional Conflict Scale).
resultsOPTION reliability was high to excellent. Communication performance was low according to OPTION and high according to the three patient administered measures. No correlations were found between observer and patient judges, neither for means nor for single items. Patient report measures showed some moderate correlations.
conclusionExisting SDM measures do not refer to a single construct. A gold standard is missing to decide whether any of these measures has the potential to indicate patient involvement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Pronounced heterogeneity of the underpinning constructs implies difficulties regarding the interpretation of existing evidence on the efficacy of SDM. Consideration of communication theory and basic definitions of SDM would recommend an inter-subjective focus of measurement.
trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN25267500.
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.