Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30385626›Full record

ArticlePediatrics2018

Cross-cultural Interactions and Shared Decision-making.

Sabrina F Derrington, Erin Paquette, Khaliah A Johnson

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Facilitators and Barriers of the Use of Prognostic Models for Clinical Decision Making in Acute Neurologic Care: A Systematic Review.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Sabrina F DerringtonDivisions of Critical Care and sderrington@luriechildrens.org.
Erin PaquetteDivisions of Critical Care and.
Khaliah A JohnsonChildren's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia; and.

Funding

NICHD NIH HHS L40 HD089260
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shared decision-making (SDM) depends on high-quality communication between the physician and the decision maker. The shared beliefs, values, behaviors, and traditions that make up an individual's culture affect the way he or she communicates and receives information and impacts complex decision-making. Cultural differences between medical providers and patients or their families may lead to wrong assumptions, disparate priorities, a lack of shared goals, and conflict. When it comes to SDM in cross-cultural encounters, we recommend that clinicians acknowledge their own cultural beliefs and values (including those stemming from the culture of medicine), maintain awareness of potential biases and assumptions, appreciate the complexity of patient and family identities and narratives, practice cultural humility, understand the moral relevance of culture, and respect patient and family preferences for SDM. We present a case that illustrates many of these issues.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonDecision MakingPhysician-Patient RelationsAttitude of Health PersonnelChild, PreschoolHumansMaleParentsPhysicians

Identifiers

PMID30385626
PMCPMC13480933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.