Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31594916›Full record

ArticleRevista espanola de salud publica2019

[Physicians' awareness and assessment of shared decision making in oncology practice.]

Nuria Padilla Garrido, Francisco Aguado Correa, Eloísa Bayo Lozano, Juan Bayo Calero, Mónica Ortega Moreno

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista espanola de salud publica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Exploring motivations and resistances for implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: A systematic review based on a structure-process-outcome model.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Nuria Padilla GarridoDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa, Estadística e Investigación Operativa. Universidad de Huelva. Huelva. España.
Francisco Aguado CorreaDepartamento de Economía Financiera, Contabilidad y Dirección de Operaciones. Universidad de Huelva. Huelva. España.
Eloísa Bayo LozanoServicio de Oncología Radioterápica. Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez. Huelva. España.
Juan Bayo CaleroServicio de Oncología Médica. Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez. Huelva. España.
Mónica Ortega MorenoDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa, Estadística e Investigación Operativa. Universidad de Huelva. Huelva. España.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImplementation of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in oncology is limited. The objective of the study was to determine the extent of physicians' awareness of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in their treatment of cancer patients, the usefulness that they assign to SDM, the role they play, their assessment of SDM, and perceptions of the main barriers and facilitators to its use.

methodsA questionnaire was completed by medical oncologists, radiation oncologists and general surgeons working in Andalusia (Spain). Sociodemographic, clinical-care and aspects of SDM variables were collected. SDM was evaluated using the SDM-Q-Doc questionnaire. Non-parametric contrasts were used to determine the possible differences between medical specialties.

resultsThe questionnaire was sent to 351 physicians. The response rate was 37.04%, 63 women and 67 men, with an average age of 45.6 years and 18.04 years' experience. Of these, 33.08% were medical oncologists, 34.61% radiation oncologists and 29.23% general surgeons. A total of 82.3% stated they had received no training in SDM, whereas 33.8% said they knew a lot about SDM and applied it in practice; 80% considered it to be very useful. In addition, 60% of respondents said they were mainly the ones who made the decisions on treatment. An evaluation of SDM on the SDM-Q-Doc scale showed that all the specialities scored more than 80/100. The main barriers to applying SDM were the difficulty patients experienced in understanding what they needed to know, the lack of decision aids and time.

conclusionsSome 82% of physicians have no training in SDM and 66% don´t use it in practice, with decisions on treatment taken mainly by the physicians themselves. Strategies to increase training in SDM and to implement it into clinical practice are important.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedMedical OncologyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Radiation OncologyAdultDecision MakingDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPhysician-Patient RelationsPhysiciansSocial ClassBarriersFacilitatorsNeoplasmsPhysician-patient relationsRoleShared decision makingSpain

Identifiers

PMID31594916
PMCPMC11583175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.