Observational studyBMC family practice2018
Shared decision making and antibiotic benefit-harm conversations: an observational study of consultations between general practitioners and patients with acute respiratory infections.
Observational study in BMC family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- To what extent do general practitioners involve patients in decision-making? A systematic review of studies using the OPTION-instrument.Primary health care research & development · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of shared decision making training programs for general practitioners.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- Information about the natural history of acute infections commonly seen in primary care: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Pooled it
- A Brief Shared Decision-Making Intervention for Acute Respiratory Infections on Antibiotic Dispensing Rates in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Trial.Annals of family medicineTrial
- From knowledge to action: a blended training to enhance shared decision making skills in primary care physicians - a pilot study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- [Antibiotic use: psychological factors influencing perceptions and behavior of physicians and patients].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
- Implementing Information Resources to Support Shared Decisions in Australian Primary Care: A Qualitative Perspective of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Strategy.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- From words to action: time for Australia to take shared decision making implementation seriously.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- Determinants of Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions for Managing Community Adult Acute Respiratory Infections: Qualitative Analysis from the OPTIMAS-GP Study Co-Design Phase.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Measures of healthcare decision-making ability in cognitive aging: a scoping review from the Advancing Reliable Measurement in Cognitive Aging and Decision-Making Ability (ARMCADA) research initiative.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Analysis of in-person general practice respiratory consultations: assessing translatability to telehealth.BJGP open · 2023Article
- The conceptualization of acute bronchitis in general practice - a fuzzy problem with consequences? A qualitative study in primary care.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Addressing Antimicrobial Stewardship in Primary Care-Developing Patient Information Sheets Using Co-Design Methodology.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Characterizing barriers to antibiotic stewardship for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department using a systems engineering framework.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022Article
- Applying Theory of Planned Behavior to Understand Physicians' Shared Decision-Making With Patients With Acute Respiratory Infections in Primary Care: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Association between Physicians' Perception of Shared Decision Making with Antibiotic Prescribing Behavior in Primary Care in Hubei, China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Using evidence-based infographics to increase parents' understanding about antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance: a proof-of-concept study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2020Article
- Do Physicians' Attitudes towards Patient-Centered Communication Promote Physicians' Intention and Behavior of Involving Patients in Medical Decisions?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Does Shared Decision Making Actually Occur in the Emergency Department? Looking at It from the Patients' Perspective.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle research has examined whether shared decision making (SDM) occurs in consultations for acute respiratory infections (ARIs), including what, and how, antibiotic benefits and harms are discussed. We aimed to analyse the extent and nature of SDM in consultations between GPs and patients with ARIs, and explore communication with and without the use of patient decision aids.
methodsThis was an observational study in Australian general practices, nested within a cluster randomised trial of decision aids (for acute otitis media [AOM], sore throat, acute bronchitis) designed for general practitioners (GPs) to use with patients, compared with usual care (no decision aids). Audio-recordings of consultations of a convenience sample of consenting patients seeing a GP for an ARI were independently analysed by two raters using the OPTION-12 (observing patient involvement in decision making) scale (maximum score of 100) and 5 items (about communicating evidence) from the Assessing Communication about Evidence and Patient Preferences (ACEPP) tool (maximum score of 5). Patients also self-completed a questionnaire post-consultation that contained items from CollaboRATE-5 (perceptions of involvement in the decision-making process), a decisional conflict scale, and a decision self-efficacy scale. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each measure.
resultsThirty-six consultations, involving 13 GPs, were recorded (20 for bronchitis, 10 sore throat, 6 AOM). The mean (SD) total OPTION-12 score was 29.4 (12.5; range 4-54), with item 12 (need to review decision) the highest (mean = 3) and item 10 (eliciting patients' preferred level of decision-making involvement) the lowest (mean = 0.1). The mean (SD) total ACEPP score was 2 (1.6), with the item about discussing benefits scoring highest. In consultations where a decision aid was used (15, 42%), compared to the 21 usual care consultations, mean observer-assessed SDM scores (OPTION-12, ACEPP scores) were higher and antibiotic harms mentioned in all (compared to only 1) consultations. Patients generally reported high decision involvement and self-efficacy, and low decisional conflict.
conclusionsThe extent of observer-assessed SDM between GPs and patients with ARIs was generally low. Balanced discussion of antibiotic benefits and harms occurred more often when decision aids were used.
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.