ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2020
The OPTION Scale: Measuring Patients' Perceptions of Shared Decision-Making in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient-centered care in the Middle East and North African region: a systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Shared Decision-Making in Dialysis Modality Selection Among Adults with Advanced Kidney Disease in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Response to the Letter Regarding: 'Exploring the Patient Engagement in the Healthcare Decision-Making Process and Its Association With Patients' Satisfaction'.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Arabic translation and psychometric validation of the Problem-Solving Decision-Making scale: A cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia.PloS one · 2026Article
- Psychometric Validation and Reliability of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: A Systematic Review.Iranian journal of public health · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the surgical informed consent for elective and emergency surgeries in obstetrics and gynaecology in Saudi Arabia.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- "I am not just a place for implementation. I should be a partner": a qualitative study of patient-centered care from the perspective of diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Shared Decision-Making: A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing Patients Awareness and Preferences in Saudi Arabia.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvolving patients in the decision-making process is now widely accepted as appropriate and ethical during consultations, particularly when several options are available. The aim of this study is to measure the patients' perceptions of shared decision-making practices during clinical encounters in Saudi Arabia.
methodsThis study employs a quantitative cross-sectional design. The OPTION scale was translated to Arabic. The questionnaire's content validity was assessed using an expert panel review. The questionnaire was then administered to 291 participants through online recruitment.
resultsParticipants reported positive perceptions of shared decision-making practices in Saudi Arabia. The lowest perceived shared decision-making scores were from patients who visited the internal medicine department (
conclusionGenerally, the study results confirmed that shared decision-making in the Saudi health system includes significant patient involvement. Interventions that enhance the culture of shared decision-making in Saudi Arabia are necessary to ensure better adherence to treatment plans and thus better health outcomes.
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.