SynthesisMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2014
"It's Valid and Reliable" Is Not Enough: Critical Appraisal of Reporting of Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.
Synthesis in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Operationalizing and Measuring Informed Choice in Health Care: An Umbrella Review.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Pooled it
- Do patient decision aids help people who are facing decisions about solid organ transplantation? A systematic review.Clinical transplantation · 2023Pooled it
- Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Pooled it
- [Measuring patient experiences in healthcare-overview of methods and the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT) as an example].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
- Article
- A scoping review of web-based, interactive, personalized decision-making tools available to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Through the patients' eyes: psychometric evaluation of the 64-item version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT-64).BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- Development and Psychometric Testing of EPAT-16: A Short and Valid Measure for Patient-Centeredness From the Patient's Perspective.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Translation and Psychometric Evaluation in Cancer Care of the German Version of collaboRATEHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the psychometric performance of the Spanish and Catalan versions of the patient reported experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC)-Compact questionnaire.The European journal of general practice · 2024Article
- Potential Unintended Consequences Of Recent Shared Decision Making Policy Initiatives.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2019Article
- Assessment of patient centredness through patient-reported experience measures (ASPIRED): protocol of a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2018Article
- A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluation studies: the development of SUNDAE Checklist.BMJ quality & safety · 2018Article
- Explanation and elaboration of the Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluations (SUNDAE) guidelines: examples of reporting SUNDAE items from patient decision aid evaluation literature.BMJ quality & safety · 2018Article
- An Individualized Approach to Cancer Screening Decisions in Older Adults: A Multilevel Framework.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Review
- A Scoping Review of Personalized, Interactive, Web-Based Clinical Decision Tools Available for Breast Cancer Prevention and Screening in the United States.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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis review systematically appraises the quality of reporting of measures used in trials to evaluate the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and presents recommendations for minimum reporting standards.
methodsWe reviewed measures of decision quality and decision process in 86 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 reviewers.
resultsInformation from 178 instances of use of measures was abstracted. Very few studies reported data on the performance of measures, with reliability (21%) and validity (16%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance. The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications.
conclusionsVery little is reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards are proposed to enable authors to prepare study reports, editors and reviewers to evaluate submitted papers, and readers to appraise published studies.
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.