ReviewBMC medical informatics and decision making2013
Balancing the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids: an updated review.
Review 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. Cited by 46 papers, 6 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
46 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Interactive Digital Decision Aids in Prenatal Screening Decision-making: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- A decision aid to support family carers of people living with dementia towards the end-of-life: Coproduction process, outcome and reflections.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Pooled it
- Interventions for promoting participation in shared decision-making for children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Parental Decision-Making and Deaf Children: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2018Pooled it
- Quantity over quality-Findings from a systematic review and environmental scan of patient decision aids on early abortion methods.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Pooled it
- Features of Computer-Based Decision Aids: Systematic Review, Thematic Synthesis, and Meta-Analyses.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Pooled it
- Trial
- Framing Effects on Decision-Making for Diagnostic Genetic Testing: Results from a Randomized Trial.Genes · 2021Trial
- Influence of Explanatory Images on Risk Perceptions and Treatment Preference.Arthritis care & research · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Treatment Decision Aid: User-Centered Design Update Approach.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Content Analysis of Promotional Materials for Prescription Drugs Authorized Under Emergency Use Authorization.Drug safety · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making Supported by Outcome Information During Discharge Planning of Patients Hospitalized With Stroke.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2026Article
- Deciding on the location for receiving parenteral antimicrobial therapy: development and preliminary testing of a patient decision aid.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Defining the strategies to advance health-literacy-friendly patient decision aids based on the ICA-NRM approach.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Supporting Meaningful Choices: A Decision Aid for Individuals Facing Existential Distress and Considering Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A multi-site study of clinician perspectives in the lifecycle of an algorithmic risk prediction tool.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2025Article
- Birth plans: Developing a shared medical decision aid tool.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Public perspective on potential treatment intervention harm in clinical trials-terminology and communication.Trials · 2024Article
- Patients' and physicians' beliefs and attitudes towards integrating personalized risk estimates into patient education about left ventricular assist device therapy.Patient education and counseling · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStandards for patient decision aids require that information and options be presented in a balanced manner; this requirement is based on the argument that balanced presentation is essential to foster informed decision making. If information is presented in an incomplete/non-neutral manner, it can stimulate cognitive biases that can unduly affect individuals' knowledge, perceptions of risks and benefits, and, ultimately, preferences. However, there is little clarity about what constitutes balance, and how it can be determined and enhanced. We conducted a literature review to examine the theoretical and empirical evidence related to balancing the presentation of information and options.
methodsA literature search related to patient decision aids and balance was conducted on Medline, using MeSH terms and PubMed; this search supplemented the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration's review of patient decision aids trials. Only English language articles relevant to patient decision making and addressing the balance of information and options were included. All members of the team independently screened clusters of articles; uncertainties were resolved by seeking review by another member. The team then worked in sub-groups to extract and synthesise data on theory, definitions, and evidence reported in these studies.
resultsA total of 40 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six explained the rationale for balancing the presentation of information and options. Twelve defined "balance"; the definition of "balance" that emerged is as follows: "The complete and unbiased presentation of the relevant options and the information about those options-in content and in format-in a way that enables individuals to process this information without bias". Ten of the 40 articles reported assessing the balance of the relevant decision aid. All 10 did so exclusively from the users' or patients' perspective, using a five-point Likert-type scale. Presenting information in a side-by-side display form was associated with more respondents (ranging from 70% to 96%) judging the information as "balanced".
conclusionThere is a need for comparative studies investigating different ways to improve and measure balance in the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids.
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.