SynthesisBMJ quality & safety2019
Impact of decision aids used during clinical encounters on clinician outcomes and consultation length: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ quality & safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 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
54 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a conversation aid for patients with thyroid nodules considering a biopsy: pilot multicenter randomized control trial.Endocrine · 2026Trial
- Reduction of cardiovascular risk factors among young men with hypertension using an interactive decision aid: cluster-randomized control trial.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Trial
- Implementation and sustainability factors of two early-stage breast cancer conversation aids in diverse practices.Implementation science : IS · 2021Trial
- Trial
- It depends on where you stand on screening: health professionals' awareness, perspectives, and approaches to overdiagnosis in cancer screening - a qualitative interview study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Attitudes and Perspectives on Shared Decision Making Among Breast Surgical Oncologists: A Qualitative Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Champions and early adopters in an implementation-effectiveness study of shared decision making: implications for interpersonal strategies.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Beyond Lip Service: A Position Paper to Truly Stimulate Shared Decision-Making.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Clinician Perspectives on the Implementation of a Web-Based Tool to Support Shared Decision-Making for Mid-Adult HPV Vaccination.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Patient and clinician views on inpatient antibiotic shared decision-making: a qualitative study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Shared decision-making in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer stage I-IV: perspectives from patients and clinicians.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of a Simulation Model-Based Tool to Support Individualized Physical Activity Discussions and Prescriptions for Breast Cancer Survivors.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Association between Exposure to Statin Choice and Adherence to Statins: An Observational Cohort Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Observational
- Improving Decision-Making Encounters in Lung Cancer Treatment: Feasibility and Acceptability of a Low-Literacy Conversation Tool (iDECIDE).CHEST pulmonary · 2025Article
- Impact of a Decision Aid on Perceptions of Shared Decision-Making in the Primary Care Management of Patients With Subacromial Pain Syndrome: A Two-Phased Multi-Methods Study.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Factors influencing the decision to discontinue treatment due to chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy among patients with metastatic breast cancer: a best-worst scaling.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Medication decision making under uncertainty: Considering chronic disease and pregnancy potential.Seminars in perinatology · 2025Review
- Decision-making in feminizing genital gender-affirming surgery - the effect of the introduction of the GenderAid decision-aid.International journal of transgender health · 2025Article
- Understanding Preferences, Needs, and Expectations for Pharmaceutical Treatment of Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids Based on Surveys of Healthcare Providers and Patients.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Shared Decision-Making Communication and Prognostic Misunderstanding in the ICU.JAMA network open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinicians' satisfaction with encounter decision aids is an important component in facilitating implementation of these tools. We aimed to determine the impact of decision aids supporting shared decision making (SDM) during the clinical encounter on clinician outcomes.
methodsWe searched nine databases from inception to June 2017. Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of decision aids used during clinical encounters with an unaided control group were eligible for inclusion. Due to heterogeneity among included studies, we used a narrative evidence synthesis approach.
resultsTwenty-five papers met inclusion criteria including 22 RCTs and 3 qualitative or mixed-methods studies nested in an RCT, together representing 23 unique trials. These trials evaluated healthcare decisions for cardiovascular prevention and treatment (n=8), treatment of diabetes mellitus (n=3), treatment of osteoporosis (n=2), treatment of depression (n=2), antibiotics to treat acute respiratory infections (n=3), cancer prevention and treatment (n=4) and prenatal diagnosis (n=1). Clinician outcomes were measured in only a minority of studies. Clinicians' satisfaction with decision making was assessed in only 8 (and only 2 of them showed statistically significantly greater satisfaction with the decision aid); only three trials asked if clinicians would recommend the decision aid to colleagues and only five asked if clinicians would use decision aids in the future. Outpatient consultations were not prolonged when a decision aid was used in 9 out of 13 trials. The overall strength of the evidence was low, with the major risk of bias related to lack of blinding of participants and/or outcome assessors.
conclusionDecision aids can improve clinicians' satisfaction with medical decision making and provide helpful information without affecting length of consultation time. Most SDM trials, however, omit outcomes related to clinicians' perspective on the decision making process or the likelihood of using a decision aid in the future.
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.