Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33712014›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Continuing professional education of Iranian healthcare professionals in shared decision-making: lessons learned.

Samira Abbasgholizadeh Rahimi, Charo Rodriguez, Jordie Croteau, Alireza Sadeghpour, Amir-Mohammad Navali, France Légaré

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

6 authors.

Samira Abbasgholizadeh RahimiDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, Canada. Samira.rahimi@mcgill.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3781-1360
Charo RodriguezDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, Canada.
Jordie CroteauL'institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS), Quebec City, Canada.
Alireza SadeghpourTabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Amir-Mohammad NavaliTabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
France LégaréDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Funding

Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Start up fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this study, we sought to assess healthcare professionals' acceptance of and satisfaction with a shared decision making (SDM) educational workshop, its impact on their intention to use SDM, and their perceived facilitators and barriers to the implementation of SDM in clinical settings in Iran.

methodsWe conducted an observational quantitative study that involved measurements before, during, and immediately after the educational intervention at stake. We invited healthcare professionals affiliated with Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran, to attend a half-day workshop on SDM in December 2016. Decisions about prenatal screening and knee replacement surgery was used as clinical vignettes. We provided a patient decision aid on prenatal screening that complied with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards and used illustrate videos. Participants completed a sociodemographic questionnaire and a questionnaire to assess their familiarity with SDM, a questionnaire based on theoretical domains framework to assess their intention to implement SDM, a questionnaire about their perceived facilitators and barriers of implementing SDM in their clinical practice, continuous professional development reaction questionnaire, and workshop evaluation. Quantitative data was analyzed descriptively and with multiple linear regression.

resultsAmong the 60 healthcare professionals invited, 41 participated (68%). Twenty-three were female (57%), 18 were specialized in family and emergency medicine, or community and preventive medicine (43%), nine were surgeons (22%), and 14 (35%) were other types of specialists. Participants' mean age was 37.51 ± 8.64 years with 8.09 ± 7.8 years of clinical experience. Prior to the workshop, their familiarity with SDM was 3.10 ± 2.82 out of 9. After the workshop, their belief that practicing SDM would be beneficial and useful (beliefs about consequences) (beta = 0.67, 95% CI 0.27, 1.06) and beliefs about capability of using SDM (beta = 0.32, 95% CI -0.08, 0.72) had the strongest influence on their intention of practicing SDM. Participants perceived the main facilitator and barrier to perform SDM were training and high patient load, respectively.

conclusionsParticipants thought the workshop was a good way to learn SDM and that they would be able to use what they had learned in their clinical practice. Future studies need to study the level of intention of participants in longer term and evaluate the impact of cultural differences on practicing SDM and its implementation in both western and non-western countries.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedEducation, ProfessionalAdultDecision MakingFemaleHumansIranMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationPregnancyContinuous professional developmentImplementationIranMedical educationPatient engagementShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID33712014
PMCPMC7953598

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.