Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35864466›Full record

ArticleBMC nephrology2022

Practices and perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals on shared decision-making in nephrology.

Sandra van Dulmen, Ruud Roodbeen, Lotte Schulze, Karen Prantl, Maarten Rookmaaker, Brigit van Jaarsveld, Janneke Noordman, Alferso Abrahams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Chronic Kidney Disease in Balkan Countries-A Call for Optimal Multidisciplinary Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Sandra van DulmenNivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands. s.vandulmen@nivel.nl.
Ruud RoodbeenBreuer&Intraval, Research and Consultancy, Groningen, Netherlands.
Lotte SchulzeNivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.
Karen PrantlDutch Kidney Patients Association, Bussum, Netherlands.
Maarten RookmaakerDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Brigit van JaarsveldDepartment of NephrologyAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam location, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Janneke NoordmanNivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.
Alferso AbrahamsDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven the complexity and variety in treatment options for advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), shared decision-making (SDM) can be a challenge. SDM is needed for making decisions that best suit patients' needs and their medical and living situations. SDM might be experienced differently by different stakeholders. This study aimed to explore clinical practice and perspectives on SDM in nephrology from three angles: observers, patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

methodsAn explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. First, in the quantitative part of the study, outpatient consultations with patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (eGFR < 20 ml/min) were video recorded and SDM was assessed using the OPTION

resultsTwenty nine consultations were recorded and observed in seven hospitals. The mean SDM score was 51 (range 25-80), indicating that SDM was applied to a moderate extent. The stimulated recall interviews with patients showed that they rely on the information provision and opinion of HCPs, expect consistency and support, and desire a proactive role. They also expect to be questioned by the HCP about their SDM preferences. HCPs said they were willing to incorporate patients' preferences in SDM, as long as there are no medical contraindications. They also prefer patients to take a prominent role in SDM. HCPs ascribe various roles to themselves in supporting patients' decision-making.

conclusionsAlthough SDM was applied by HCPs to a moderate extent, improvement is needed, especially in helping patients get the information they need and in making sure that every patient is involved in SDM. This is even more important given the complex nature of the disease and the relatively high prevalence of limited health literacy among patients with chronic kidney disease.

Indexed as

NephrologyRenal Insufficiency, ChronicDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedHealth PersonnelHumansPatient ParticipationCommunicationNephrologyObservational studyQualitative studyShared decision-makingStimulated recall interviewsVideo-recording

Identifiers

PMID35864466
PMCPMC9306155

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.