ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Implementation of a shared decision-making training program for clinicians based on the major depressive disorder guidelines in Japan: A multi-center cluster randomized trial.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shared Decision Making as a Policy and Clinical Framework for the Responsible Introduction of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Therapy in Japan.Psychiatry investigation · 2026Article
- Shared Decision Making and Advance Care Planning in the Context of Promoting Home Medical Care in Japan: A Narrative Review.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Review
- Bridging the Gap Between Efficacy and Practice: A Systematic Review of Shared Decision-Making in Severe Mental Illness.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Shared decision making in eating disorders: the patient and clinician perspectives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Quality of Life Measurement Tools in Interventions for Anxiety and Depressive Disorders: A Systematic Literature Review in Global Settings.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Review
- Assessment of minimum clinically important difference in symptoms and functionality of Japanese patients with major depressive disorder following inadequate response to antidepressants: aFrontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Conceptualizing and Measuring Trust, Mistrust, and Distrust: Implications for Advancing Health Equity and Building Trustworthiness.Annual review of public health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although shared treatment decision-making with patients requires attention, it is not widely implemented, particularly in the field of psychiatry. The aim of this study was to assess whether a shared decision-making (SDM) training program for clinicians based on the major depressive disorder (MDD) guidelines improved the perceived involvement of the decision process for patients with MDD. Methods: A multi-center cluster-randomized controlled intervention of a clinician training program based on the Japanese MDD guidelines using related decision aids compared to usual care was conducted among 56 clinicians from 23 institutions. A total of 124 patients with MDD were enrolled in this study. The primary outcomes were the scores of the Shared Decision Making-Questionnaire-9 (SDM-Q-9) and Decision Conflict Scale (DCS) after the first visit to the outpatient clinics. The secondary outcomes were patients' satisfaction, quality of life, trust in clinicians, and depressive symptoms. Additionally, we evaluated all the observed outcomes at the first and third months of follow-up. Results: The scores of the SDM-Q-9 in the SDM training program group were significantly higher than those in the control group at the first visit. However, no significant difference in the DCS scores was found between the two groups. There was no intervention effect for secondary outcomes and the outcomes at the first- and third-month follow-up visits. Conclusion: The clinician training program based on the Japanese MDD guidelines can be useful for implementation of SDM. Additional research is needed to confirm the efficacy of this SDM training program. Clinical trial registration: [https://www.umin.ac.jp/], identifier [UMIN000034397].
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.