Observational studyEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2020
When does shared decision making is adopted in psychiatric clinical practice? Results from a European multicentric study.
Observational study in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shared decision making in eating disorders: the patient and clinician perspectives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Electroconvulsive therapy and autobiographical memory.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026Article
- Implementing shared decision-making for hospitalized patients with schizophrenia: a qualitative study of nurse and patient perspectives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Preferences for Decision-Making Style and Knowledge of and Attitudes To Recovery in Mental Health Professionals Working in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings in Routine Mental Health Practice: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study in the Danish Mental Health Services.Administration and policy in mental health · 2026Article
- Research Progress of Shared Decision-Making in Schizophrenia with Anxiety.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2024Review
- Shared decision making and associated factors among patients with psychotic disorders: a cross-sectional study.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Clinical decision-making style preferences of European psychiatrists: Results from the Ambassadors survey in 38 countries.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Review
- Psychometric Properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9): Validation of the Italian Version in a Large Psychiatric Clinical Sample.Clinical neuropsychiatry · 2022Article
- Developments in the psychological treatment of anorexia nervosa and their implications for daily practice.Current opinion in psychiatry · 2020Review
- Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis.Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS · 2020Review
- The role of shared decision-making in improving adherence to pharmacological treatments in patients with schizophrenia: a clinical review.Annals of general psychiatry · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To identify factors associated with the use of shared decision making in routine mental health care in a large multicenter European study. Data have been collected within the study "Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness" (CEDAR), which is a naturalistic, longitudinal, observational study carried out in six European countries. Patients with a severe mental illness attending outpatient units and their treating clinicians have been recruited. Clinicians' Clinical Decision Making (CDM) styles have been explored through the Clinical Decision Making Style Scale. Patients' clinical and social outcomes have been assessed through validated assessment instruments. The sample consisted of 588 patients and 213 professionals. Professionals were mainly psychiatrists (35.7%), nurses (21.6%), support workers, social workers or occupational therapists (24.9%), psychologists (9.9%) or trainees in psychiatry (4.7%). In the majority of cases, clinicians adopted a shared CDM style. Shared CDM was more frequently adopted with patients with psychotic disorders, with a better quality of life and social functioning. At multivariate analyses, the likelihood of adopting shared decision making increased in patients with higher levels of interpersonal relationships' skills (p < 0.05) and global functioning (p < 0.01). On the contrary, being a trainee in psychiatry reduced the likelihood of adopting shared CDM (p < 0.008). Shared decision making has been adopted mainly when patients have a better functioning and less severe clinical symptomatology and by less trained clinicians, differently from national and international recommendations. More efforts should be made to implement interventions to promote shared CDM, with a specific focus for trainees in psychiatry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31175448What 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.