Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31348062›Full record

ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2020

Uncertainty in Decision Making in Medicine: A Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis of Conceptual Models.

Marieka A Helou, Deborah DiazGranados, Michael S Ryan, John W Cyrus

Abstract readComparative StudyScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Early treatment goal uncertainty as a barrier to regional analgesia and respiratory deterioration in traumatic rib fractures: a propensity-weighted analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

4 authors.

Marieka A HelouM.A. Helou is assistant professor, Department of Pediatrics, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8650-5901. D. DiazGranados is assistant professor, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0624-7093. M.S. Ryan is associate professor, Department of Pediatrics, and assistant dean for clinical medical education, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3266-9289. J.W. Cyrus is assistant professor, Tompkins-McCaw Library for the Health Sciences, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5331-5151.
Deborah DiazGranados
Michael S Ryan
John W Cyrus

Funding

Research Supplement to Promote Diversity in Health Related ResearchUL1TR002649 · NCATS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI MOELLER, FREDERICK GERARD · 2018 to 2022
$19.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002649
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe practice of medicine is rarely straightforward. Data used to facilitate medical decision making may be conflicting, ambiguous, or scarce, and providing optimal care requires balancing clinicians' expertise and available evidence with patients' preferences. To explore uncertainty in decision making across disciplines, the authors performed a scoping review and thematic analysis of the literature to formulate a model describing the decision-making process in medicine under uncertain conditions.

methodIn 2016, the authors performed a comprehensive search of key databases using a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary. They identified and reviewed 3,398 records. After applying their inclusion and exclusion criteria to the titles and abstracts and then full texts, 19 articles were selected. The authors applied a qualitative thematic analysis to these articles, using codes to extract themes related to uncertainty in decision making.

resultsThe 19 articles spanned 6 fields of study and 5 disciplines within the health sciences. The thematic analysis revealed 6 main themes: recognition of uncertainty, classification of uncertainty, stakeholder perspectives, knowledge acquisition, decision-making approach, and evaluation of the decision-making process.

conclusionsBased on the themes that emerged from their thematic analysis of the literature characterizing the effects of uncertainty and ambiguity on the decision-making process, the authors developed a framework depicting the interplay between these themes with a visual representation of the decision-making process under uncertain conditions. Future research includes further development and validation of this framework to inform medical school curricula.

Indexed as

UncertaintyAdaptation, PsychologicalClinical Decision-MakingCurriculumHumansKnowledgeMedicinePhysiciansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Qualitative ResearchStress, Psychological

Identifiers

PMID31348062
PMCPMC6925325

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.