Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24624947›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2013

Ten years of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: evolution of the core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision aids.

Robert J Volk, Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas, Dawn Stacey, Glyn Elwyn

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 154 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
154citing papers in PubMed, 11 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.

NCT04240717 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Shared Decision Making on Immunotherapy in Oncology - Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital HeidelbergRan2020 to 2022Enrolled126ConditionsPatient Decision Aid, Treatment As UsualArmsPatient Decision Aid
NCT04995796 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Testing the Decision Aid: Supporting Patient Decisions About Upper Extremity Surgery in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury (AIM 3)

TypeinterventionalSponsorWashington University School of MedicineRan2021 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsCervical Spinal Cord Injury, TetraplegiaArmsSurveys for Research Purposes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

154 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Co-design development of a decision guide on eating and drinking for people with severe dementia during acute hospital admissions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Values clarification and parental decision making about newborn genomic sequencing.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

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

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

4 authors.

Robert J Volk
Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas
Dawn Stacey
Glyn Elwyn

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2003, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration was established to enhance the quality and effectiveness of patient decision aids by establishing an evidence-informed framework for improving their content, development, implementation, and evaluation. Over this 10 year period, the Collaboration has established: a) the background document on 12 core dimensions to inform the original modified Delphi process to establish the IPDAS checklist (74 items); b) the valid and reliable IPDAS instrument (47 items); and c) the IPDAS qualifying (6 items), certifying (6 items + 4 items for screening), and quality criteria (28 items). The objective of this paper is to describe the evolution of the IPDAS Collaboration and discuss the standardized process used to update the background documents on the theoretical rationales, evidence and emerging issues underlying the 12 core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision aids.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesPatient ParticipationReference StandardsChecklistCooperative BehaviorHealth Services ResearchHumansTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24624947
PMCPMC4044280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.