Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28752808›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

Decision-Making in Audiology: Balancing Evidence-Based Practice and Patient-Centered Care.

Isabelle Boisvert, Jennifer Clemesha, Erik Lundmark, Erica Crome, Caitlin Barr, Catherine M McMahon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Shared decision making: audiology student perspectives.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Audiologists' presbycusis and associated tinnitus counselling practices within the KwaZulu-Natal province.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Comments on nutritional recommendations for CoVID-19 quarantine.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Isabelle Boisvert1 Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Jennifer Clemesha1 Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Erik Lundmark3 Department of Business and Economics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Erica Crome4 Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Caitlin Barr2 The HEARing CRC, Melbourne, Australia.
Catherine M McMahon1 Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Macquarie University · AUAustralian Hearing · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health-care service delivery models have evolved from a practitioner-centered approach toward a patient-centered ideal. Concurrently, increasing emphasis has been placed on the use of empirical evidence in decision-making to increase clinical accountability. The way in which clinicians use empirical evidence and client preferences to inform decision-making provides an insight into health-care delivery models utilized in clinical practice. The present study aimed to investigate the sources of information audiologists use when discussing rehabilitation choices with clients, and discuss the findings within the context of evidence-based practice and patient-centered care. To assess the changes that may have occurred over time, this study uses a questionnaire based on one of the few studies of decision-making behavior in audiologists, published in 1989. The present questionnaire was completed by 96 audiologists who attended the World Congress of Audiology in 2014. The responses were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative approaches. Results suggest that audiologists rank clinical test results and client preferences as the most important factors for decision-making. Discussion with colleagues or experts was also frequently reported as an important source influencing decision-making. Approximately 20% of audiologists mentioned utilizing research evidence to inform decision-making when no clear solution was available. Information shared at conferences was ranked low in terms of importance and reliability. This study highlights an increase in awareness of concepts associated with evidence-based practice and patient-centered care within audiology settings, consistent with current research-to-practice dissemination pathways. It also highlights that these pathways may not be sufficient for an effective clinical implementation of these practices.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelAudiologistsAudiologyCommunicationCongresses as TopicDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHealth Care SurveysHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, Organizationalaudiologydecision-makingevidence-based practicepatient-centered care

Identifiers

PMID28752808
PMCPMC5536381
OpenAlexW2741808249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.