ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2011
Shared decision making: using health information technology to integrate patient choice into primary care.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Supporting shared decision making for older people with multiple health and social care needs: a realist synthesis.BMC geriatrics · 2018Pooled it
- A randomized controlled trial to evaluate innovative decision support in the context of fall prevention.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Practical applications of methods to incorporate patient preferences into medical decision models: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- User-Centered Design of a Preference-Driven Patient Activation Tool for Optimizing Depression Treatment in Integrated Primary Care Settings (The Transform DepCare Study).Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Electronic Health Record Technology Designed for the Clinical Encounter: MS NeuroShare.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2021Article
- Ready for Prime Time? Using Normalization Process Theory to Evaluate Implementation Success of Personal Health Records Designed for Decision Making.Frontiers in digital health · 2020Article
- Patients' Use and Perception of Internet-Based Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Resources.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2018Article
- Computerized Decision Aids for Shared Decision Making in Serious Illness: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2017Article
- Patient choice, Internet based information sources, and perceptions of health care: Evidence from Sweden using survey data from 2010 and 2013.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- A Model of Organizational Context and Shared Decision Making: Application to LGBT Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
- Patient Activation: A Primary Care Tool to Tackle Overweight and Obesity.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2015Article
- Shared decision making: a fundamental tenet in a conceptual framework of integrative healthcare delivery.Integrative medicine insights · 2013Article
- Meeting them where they are: Using the Internet to deliver behavioral medicine interventions for pain.Translational behavioral medicine · 2012Review
- To Tell or Not to Tell: Shared Decision Making, CAM Use and Disclosure Among Underserved Patients with Rheumatic Diseases.Integrative medicine insights · 2012Article
- An Informatics Approach to Implement Support for Shared Decision Making for Primary Prevention Statin Therapy.MDM policy & practiceArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in shared decision making (SDM) have not successfully translated to practice. We describe our experience and lessons learned in translating an SDM process for primary care cardiovascular disease management. The SDM process operationalized recognized SDM elements using workflow modifications, a computerized patient questionnaire, an automated risk calculator to identify at-risk patients, a web-based tool for patients to choose interventions, automated feedback on the personalized benefits of choices, and a web-based tool for providers to view patient risk, patient choice, and expert advice. Although medication was typically the intervention resulting in the greatest risk reduction, the majority of patients preferred dietary and other lifestyle changes. Patients generally favored the opportunity to make and communicate choices. However, providers only viewed patient choice data in 20% of the encounters. Translation of the SDM process was successful for patients and the difference between patient choice and optimal risk reduction points to the importance of engaging in an SDM process. Lack of engagement by providers may be due to "alert fatigue" or to the failure of the SDM process to improve efficiency in the office visit.
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.