Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36743877›Full record

ReviewEuropean heart journal. Digital health2023

What helps the successful implementation of digital decision aids supporting shared decision-making in cardiovascular diseases? A systematic review.

Loes J Peters, Alezandra Torres-Castaño, Faridi S van Etten-Jamaludin, Lilisbeth Perestelo Perez, Dirk T Ubbink

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European heart journal. Digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Loes J PetersDepartment of Surgery, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0332-6842
Alezandra Torres-CastañoCanary Islands Health Research Institute Foundation (FIISC), Tenerife, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4690-1421
Faridi S van Etten-JamaludinResearch Support Medical Library, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0637-8165
Lilisbeth Perestelo PerezEvaluation Unit of the Canary Islands Health Service (SESCS), REDISSEC, Tenerife, Spain.
Dirk T UbbinkDepartment of Surgery, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9398-8879
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLHealth Research Institute of the Balearic Islands · ESServicio Canario de la Salud · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Although digital decision aids (DAs) have been developed to improve shared decision-making (SDM), also in the cardiovascular realm, its implementation seems challenging. This study aims to systematically review the predictors of successful implementation of digital DAs for cardiovascular diseases. Methods and results: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias. Data were extracted by using a predefined list of variables. Five good-quality studies were included, involving data of 215 patients and 235 clinicians. Studies focused on DAs for coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and end-stage heart failure patients. Clinicians reported DA content, its effectivity, and a lack of knowledge on SDM and DA use as implementation barriers. Patients reported preference for another format, the way clinicians used the DA and anxiety for the upcoming intervention as barriers. In addition, barriers were related to the timing and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) integration of the DA, the limited duration of a consultation, a lack of communication among the team members, and maintaining the hospital's number of treatments. Clinicians' positive attitude towards preference elicitation and implementation of DAs in existing structures were reported as facilitators. Conclusion: To improve digital DA use in cardiovascular diseases, the optimum timing of the DA, training healthcare professionals in SDM and DA usage, and integrating DAs into existing ICT structures need special effort. Current evidence, albeit limited, already offers advice on how to improve DA implementation in cardiovascular medicine.

Indexed as

BarriersCardiovascular diseasesDecision aidsDigital toolsFacilitatorsImplementationShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID36743877
PMCPMC9890083
OpenAlexW4308708847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.