ArticleBMJ open2016
Patient involvement in decision-making: a cross-sectional study in a Malaysian primary care clinic.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.
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
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- Japanese hematologists' and oncologists' perceptions of patient preferences for shared decision-making.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Factors influencing patient involvement in treatment decision-making for diabetic retinopathy: a mixed methods study protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Article
- Shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers at rural health facilities in Eastern Uganda: an exploratory qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Exploring Patient Involvement in Treatment Decision-Making for Diabetic Retinopathy: A COM-B Model-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Experiences and ethical issues during shared decision-making in healthcare at rural health facilities in Uganda: An exploratory qualitative study.Research square · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Gothenburg Empowerment Scale (GES): psychometric properties and measurement invariance in adults with congenital heart disease from Belgium, Norway and South Korea.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Decision-making for Risk-reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in Southeast Asian BRCA Mutation Carriers With Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Patient Involvement in the Transfusion Decision-Making Can Change Patient Blood Management Practice for Better or Worse.Acta haematologica · 2022Observational
- Patient Preferences in Shared Decision Making During Healthcare and Associated Factors Among Adult Admitted Patients at Public Hospitals of West Shoa Oromia, Ethiopia.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Do socio-economically disadvantaged patients prefer shared decision-making?South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2021Article
- Comparison of shared decision making in patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for choosing a dialysis modality.BMC nephrology · 2021Article
- Patients' Involvement in Decision-Making During Healthcare in a Developing Country: A Cross-Sectional Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Shared Decision-Making and Role Preference Among Patients With Schizophrenia in Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Article
- A best-worst scaling survey of medical students' perspective on implementing shared decision-making in China.BMC medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveShared decision-making has been advocated as a useful model for patient management. In developing Asian countries such as Malaysia, there is a common belief that patients prefer a passive role in clinical consultation. As such, the objective of this study was to determine Malaysian patients' role preference in decision-making and the associated factors.
designA cross-sectional study.
settingStudy was conducted at an urban primary care clinic in Malaysia in 2012.
participantsPatients aged >21 years were chosen using systematic random sampling.
methodsConsenting patients answered a self-administered questionnaire, which included demographic data and their preferred and actual role before and after consultation. Doctors were asked to determine patients' role preference. The Control Preference Scale was used to assess patients' role preference. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Prevalence of patients' preferred role in decision-making. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (1) Actual role played by the patient in decision-making. (2) Sociodemographic factors associated with patients' preferred role in decision-making. (3) Doctors' perception of patients' involvement in decision-making.
resultsThe response rate was 95.1% (470/494). Shared decision-making was preferred by 51.9% of patients, followed by passive (26.3%) and active (21.8%) roles in decision-making. Higher household income was significantly associated with autonomous role preference (p=0.018). Doctors' perception did not concur with patients' preferred role. Among patients whom doctors perceived to prefer a passive role, 73.5% preferred an autonomous role (p=0.900, κ=0.006).
conclusionsThe majority of patients attending the primary care clinic preferred and played an autonomous role in decision-making. Doctors underestimated patients' preference to play an autonomous role.
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.