ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2019
Reconciling the theory and reality of shared decision-making: A "matching" approach to practitioner leadership.
Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Communication and support of patients and caregivers in chronic cancer care: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline.ESMO open · 2024Guideline
- Investigating the Impact of Online Abortion Myths on Health Care Providers and Advocates: Interview Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- PeriOperative Quality Initiative consensus statement recommendations on the definitions, aims and delivery of shared decision-making for major surgery.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
- The factors involved in surgical decision-making in younger women diagnosed with breast cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand: A qualitative analysis.Journal of health psychology · 2024Article
- Validation of the Novel Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to Facilitate Multidisciplinary Team Building in Patient-Centered Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- 'I Don't Like Uncertainty, I Like to Know': How and why uveal melanoma patients consent to life expectancy prognostication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Supporting Health and Medical Decision Making: Findings and Insights from Fuzzy-Trace Theory.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
- Stakeholder involvement in care transition planning for older adults and the factors guiding their decision-making: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- An insight into patients' perspectives on barriers affecting participation in shared decision making among patients with diabetes mellitus in Malawi.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Teaching Shared Decision Making to Undergraduate Medical Students.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2021Article
- The conceptualisation of patient-centred care: A case study of diabetes management in public facilities in southern Malawi.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2021Article
- Influencers of the Decision to Undergo Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy among Women with Unilateral Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2021Article
- Qualitative Examination of Shared Decision-Making in Canada's Largest Health System: More Work to be Done : Shared Decision-Making-More Work to be Done.Journal of patient experience · 2021Article
- Why women chose unassisted home birth in Malaysia: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Article
- Reflections on a Health Psychology Service for Patients with Uveal Melanoma: The Challenge of Psychological Screening and Intervention When Distress is 'Normal'.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2019Article
- Reconciling the theory and reality of shared decision-making: A "matching" approach to practitioner leadership.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Shared decision making (SDM) evolved to resolve tension between patients' entitlement to make health-care decisions and practitioners' responsibility to protect patients' interests. Implicitly assuming that patients are willing and able to make "good" decisions, SDM proponents suggest that patients and practitioners negotiate decisions. In practice, patients often do not wish to participate in decisions, or cannot make good decisions. Consequently, practitioners sometimes lead decision making, but doing so risks the paternalism that SDM is intended to avoid. We argue that practitioners should take leadership when patients cannot make good decisions, but practitioners will need to know: (a) when good decisions are not being made; and (b) how to intervene appropriately and proportionately when patients cannot make good decisions. Regarding (a), patients rarely make decisions using formal decision logic, but rely on informal propositions about risks and benefits. As propositions are idiographic and their meanings context-dependent, normative standards of decision quality cannot be imposed. Practitioners must assess decision quality by making subjective and contextualized judgements as to the "reasonableness" of the underlying propositions. Regarding (b), matched to judgements of reasonableness, we describe levels of leadership distinguished according to how directively practitioners act; ranging from prompting patients to question unreasonable propositions or consider new propositions, to directive leadership whereby practitioners recommend options or deny requested procedures. In the context of ideas of relational autonomy, the objective of practitioner leadership is to protect patients' autonomy by supporting good decision making, taking leadership in patients' interests only when patients are unwilling or unable to make good decisions.
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.