ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2016
The Evolution of an Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making Research Program: Reflective Case Study of an Emerging Paradigm.
Article in International journal of integrated care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Analysis of Influencing Factors and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Qualitative Studies.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Engaging Caregivers in Health-Related Housing Decisions for Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: A Cluster Randomized Trial.The Gerontologist · 2020Trial
- Clinicians' Perspectives on Strengthening Interprofessional Teamwork to Support Surrogate Decision-Makers of Critically Ill Patients in ICUs.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Team-Based Diabetes Care in Ontario and Hong Kong: a Comparative Review.Current diabetes reports · 2023Review
- Development and implementation of a decision aid for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction for Japanese women with breast cancer: a field-testing study.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making Training Programs for Health Care Professionals Using Reflexivity Strategies: Secondary Analysis of a Systematic Review.JMIR medical education · 2022Review
- Medication use problems among older adults at a primary care: A narrative of literature review.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2022Review
- Examining the Theoretical Relationship between Constructs in the Person-Centred Practice Framework: A Structural Equation Model.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- What older adults and their caregivers need for making better health-related decisions at home: a participatory mixed methods protocol.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Fostering gerontology students' competence in Interprofessional collaborative practice.BMC medical education · 2020Article
- Challenges and Solutions for the Implementation of Shared Decision-making in Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2020Article
- Development of a program theory for shared decision-making: a realist synthesis.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- A Model for Promoting Occupational Safety and Health in Taiwan's Hospitals: An Integrative Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Physician and Pharmacist Medication Decision-Making in the Time of Electronic Health Records: Mixed-Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2018Article
- Deciding How to Stay Independent at Home in Later Years: Development and Acceptability Testing of an Informative Web-Based Module.JMIR human factors · 2017Article
- Development of a program theory for shared decision-making: a realist review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- Shared decision making: relevant concepts and facilitating strategies.Epidemiology and health · 2017Article
- Decision-Making Dilemmas within Integrated Care Service Networks: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare research increasingly focuses on interprofessional collaboration and on shared decision making, but knowledge gaps remain about effective strategies for implementing interprofessional collaboration and shared decision-making together in clinical practice. We used Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions to reflect on how an integrated interprofessional shared decision-making approach was developed and implemented over time.
methodsIn 2007, an interdisciplinary team initiated a new research program to promote the implementation of an interprofessional shared decision-making approach in clinical settings. For this reflective case study, two new team members analyzed the team's four projects, six research publications, one unpublished and two published protocols and organized them into recognizable phases according to Kuhn's theory.
resultsThe merging of two young disciplines led to challenges characteristic of emerging paradigms. Implementation of interprofessional shared-decision making was hindered by a lack of conceptual clarity, a dearth of theories and models, little methodological guidance, and insufficient evaluation instruments. The team developed a new model, identified new tools, and engaged knowledge users in a theory-based approach to implementation. However, several unresolved challenges remain. DISCUSSION: This reflective case study sheds light on the evolution of interdisciplinary team science. It offers new approaches to implementing emerging knowledge in the clinical context.
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.