Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31585534›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019

Shared decision making when patients consider surgery for lumbar herniated disc: development and test of a patient decision aid.

Stina Brogård Andersen, Mikkel Ø Andersen, Leah Y Carreon, Angela Coulter, Karina Dahl Steffensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Exploring Values Clarification and Health-Literate Design in Patient Decision Aids: A Qualitative Interview Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A Decision Aid for Patients Considering Surgery for Sciatica: Codesign and User-Testing With Patients and Clinicians.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Reconciling evidence and experience in the context of evidence-based practice.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2021
    Article
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

5 authors.

Stina Brogård AndersenSpine Surgery and Research, Spine Center of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Øster Hougvej 55, Middelfart, Denmark. stina.brogard.andersen@rsyd.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-2259-1035
Mikkel Ø AndersenSpine Surgery and Research, Spine Center of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Øster Hougvej 55, Middelfart, Denmark.
Leah Y CarreonSpine Surgery and Research, Spine Center of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Øster Hougvej 55, Middelfart, Denmark.
Angela CoulterCenter for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.
Karina Dahl SteffensenCenter for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision making (SDM) is a systematic approach aimed at improving patient involvement in preference-sensitive health care decisions. Choosing between surgical or non-surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation, can be difficult as the evidence of a superior treatment is unclear, which makes it a preference-sensitive decision. The objectives of this study was therefore to assess the degree of SDM and afterwards to develop and test a patient decision aid (PtDA) to support SDM during the clinical encounter between surgeon and patient, when patients choose between surgical and non-surgical treatment for Lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

methodsThe study was conducted in four steps. 1) Assessment of the extent to which SDM was practiced in the spine clinic. 2) Development of a PtDA to support SDM. 3) Testing its usability and acceptability amongst potential users (patients). 4) Pilot-test of its usability in the clinical setting.

resultsResults from our small baseline study (n = 40) showed that between a third and two-thirds of the patients reported not being fully engaged in a shared decision. A pre-designed template (BESLUTNINGSHJÆLPER™) was adapted to support the decision about whether or not to have surgery for LDH. Testing the prototype with patients led to minor refinements. A subsequent pilot test of its usability in a clinical setting achieved positive responses from both patients and clinicians.

conclusionOur baseline study demonstrated that SDM was not universally practiced in the clinic. The PtDA we have developed was rated as acceptable and usable by both patients and clinicians for helping those with LDH choose between surgical or non- surgical treatment. This tool now requires further testing to assess its effectiveness.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDecision Making, SharedLumbar VertebraePatient ParticipationAdultFemaleHumansIntervertebral Disc DisplacementMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionLumbar disc herniationPatient decision aidShared decision makingSpine surgery

Identifiers

PMID31585534
PMCPMC6778367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.