ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020
Shared decision making in surgery: a scoping review of patient and surgeon preferences.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Analysis of Influencing Factors and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Qualitative Studies.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Behaviour, barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in breast cancer surgical treatment: A qualitative systematic review using a 'Best Fit' framework approach.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Three-Dimensional-Printed Models and Shared Decision-Making: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- The Effect of a Surgeon Communication Strategy on Treatment Preference for Thyroid Cancer: A Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Trial
- Accessibility and Decision-Supportive Quality of Benign Breast Disease Articles on Chinese Hospital WeChat Public Accounts: Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making in the Management of Deep Partial-Thickness Burns: Development and Implementation of a Multicomponent Decision Aid.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient experiences of tissue donation and digital consent support in primary craniospinal tumour research.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- How is shared decision making used in the treatment of patients with liver disease? a scoping review.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Patient-centered valuation of minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer: a discrete choice experiment.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2026Article
- Challenges in establishing ambulatory surgery in a Moroccan general surgery department.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Designing a SPIKES-based protocol for communicating uncertainty in indeterminate thyroid cytology: a mixed-method analysis within a pilot study.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Observational
- Endoscopic balloon dilation for peptic gastroduodenal stenosis with gastric outflow obstruction: effectiveness, durability and early predictors of unsatisfactory outcomes.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Beyond Bleeding, Infection, Damage to Surrounding Structures: Challenges and Opportunities When Communicating about Surgical Risks.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026Review
- From Classroom to Clinic: A Scoping Review of Critical Thinking and Decision-Making in Orthopaedic Education for Medical Students and Residents.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Shared decision-making in urinary reconstruction among radical cystectomy patients: a thematic analysis of patient and provider perspectives in China.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Language-specific approaches to reduce perioperative stress and anxiety related to anaesthesia for patients with limited English proficiency: A narrative review.Journal of perioperative practice · 2025Review
- The clinical application of shared decision-making in emergency surgery: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- From Burden to Empowerment. Patient-Reported Influencing Factors on Participation in Shared Decision Making in Oncology, a Meta-Study.Psycho-oncology · 2025Review
- AMPDECIDE amputation level patient decision aids: a feasibility study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany suggest that shared decision-making (SDM) is the most effective approach to clinical counseling. It is unclear if this applies to surgical decision-making-especially regarding urgent, highly-morbid operations. In this scoping review, we identify articles that address patient and surgeon preferences toward SDM in surgery.
methodsWe used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) to develop our protocol. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception through 11.2017. Title/abstract review identified peer-reviewed, empirical articles that addressed patient/surgeon preferences toward SDM in surgery. Identified articles underwent full review by two independent investigators. We addressed the following questions: (1) What is known from existing empirical evidence about patients' and/or surgeons' surgical decision-making preferences? (2) Why might patients and/or surgeons prefer SDM? (3) Does acuity of intervention impact surgical decision-making preferences? Outcome measures included study methods, surgical specialty, diagnosis, study location/setting, type/number of subjects, acuity of intervention, surgeon/patient decision-making preferences, and factors associated with favoring SDM. Data was analyzed in Microsoft Excel.
results20,359 articles were identified with 4988 duplicates, yielding 15,371 articles for title/abstract review. 74 articles were included in final analysis. 68% of articles discussed oncologic decision-making. 46% of these focused on breast cancer. 92% of articles included patients, 22% included surgeons. 75% of articles found surgeons favored SDM, 25% demonstrated surgeons favored surgeon guidance. 54% of articles demonstrated patients favored SDM, 35% showed patients favored surgeon guidance, 11% showed patients preferred independent decision-making. The most common factors for patients favoring SDM included female gender, higher education, and younger age. For surgeons, the most common factors for favoring SDM included limited evidence for a given treatment plan, multiple treatment options, and impact on patient lifestyle. No articles evaluated decision-making preferences in an emergent setting.
conclusionsThere has been limited evaluation of patient and surgeon preferences toward SDM in surgical decision-making. Generally, patients and surgeons expressed preference toward SDM. None of the articles evaluated decision-making preferences in an emergent setting, so assessment of the impact of acuity on decision-making preferences is limited. Extension of research to complex, emergent clinical settings is needed.
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.