ReviewBMC medical informatics and decision making2014
Publication trends of shared decision making in 15 high impact medical journals: a full-text review with bibliometric analysis.
Review in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2014. 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.
- Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Perspectives of Patients Seeking Bariatric Surgery: The Impact of Early Patient-Provider Communication on Bariatric Surgery Utilization.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Shared Decision-Making in Korean Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Global Scientific Research Landscape on Medical Informatics From 2011 to 2020: Bibliometric Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Patient-Led Decision-Making for HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2021Review
- What and how are students taught about communicating risks to patients? Analysis of a medical curriculum.PloS one · 2020Observational
- Shared Decision Making and Choice for Bariatric Surgery.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Integrating patient perspectives in medical decision-making: a qualitative interview study examining potentials within the rare disease information exchange process in practice.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
- Observational
- Tracking knowledge evolution, hotspots and future directions of emerging technologies in cancers research: a bibliometrics review.Journal of Cancer · 2019Review
- Trends in Shared Decision-Making Studies From 2009 to 2018: A Bibliometric Analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
- Primary versus secondary source of data in observational studies and heterogeneity in meta-analyses of drug effects: a survey of major medical journals.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
- Engaging Patients in Decisions About Cancer Screening: Exploring the Decision Journey Through the Use of a Patient Portal.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Article
- Retrieval of publications addressing shared decision making: an evaluation of full-text searches on medical journal websites.JMIR research protocols · 2015Article
- Shared Decision-Making in Youth Mental Health Care: Using the Evidence to Plan Treatments Collaboratively.Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShared Decision Making (SDM) is increasingly advocated as a model for medical decision making. However, there is still low use of SDM in clinical practice. High impact factor journals might represent an efficient way for its dissemination. We aimed to identify and characterize publication trends of SDM in 15 high impact medical journals.
methodsWe selected the 15 general and internal medicine journals with the highest impact factor publishing original articles, letters and editorials. We retrieved publications from 1996 to 2011 through the full-text search function on each journal website and abstracted bibliometric data. We included publications of any type containing the phrase "shared decision making" or five other variants in their abstract or full text. These were referred to as SDM publications. A polynomial Poisson regression model with logarithmic link function was used to assess the evolution across the period of the number of SDM publications according to publication characteristics.
resultsWe identified 1285 SDM publications out of 229,179 publications in 15 journals from 1996 to 2011. The absolute number of SDM publications by journal ranged from 2 to 273 over 16 years. SDM publications increased both in absolute and relative numbers per year, from 46 (0.32% relative to all publications from the 15 journals) in 1996 to 165 (1.17%) in 2011. This growth was exponential (P < 0.01). We found fewer research publications (465, 36.2% of all SDM publications) than non-research publications, which included non-systematic reviews, letters, and editorials. The increase of research publications across time was linear. Full-text search retrieved ten times more SDM publications than a similar PubMed search (1285 vs. 119 respectively).
conclusionThis review in full-text showed that SDM publications increased exponentially in major medical journals from 1996 to 2011. This growth might reflect an increased dissemination of the SDM concept to the medical community.
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.