ArticleWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2023
Time for a paradigm shift in shared decision-making in trauma and emergency surgery? Results from an international survey.
Article in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient and clinician views on inpatient antibiotic shared decision-making: a qualitative study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Challenges in the Literature Around Context-Sensitive Implementation of Shared Decision Making in Emergency Medicine: A Scoping Review.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2025Review
- Are we ready for "green surgery" to promote environmental sustainability in the operating room? Results from the WSES STAR investigation.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2024Article
- A qualitative study on informed consent decision-making at two tertiary hospitals in Uganda: Experiences of patients undergoing emergency surgery and their next of kin.SAGE open medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 11 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShared decision-making (SDM) between clinicians and patients is one of the pillars of the modern patient-centric philosophy of care. This study aims to explore SDM in the discipline of trauma and emergency surgery, investigating its interpretation as well as the barriers and facilitators for its implementation among surgeons.
methodsGrounding on the literature on the topics of the understanding, barriers, and facilitators of SDM in trauma and emergency surgery, a survey was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was sent to all 917 WSES members, advertised through the society's website, and shared on the society's Twitter profile.
resultsA total of 650 trauma and emergency surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the initiative. Less than half of the surgeons understood SDM, and 30% still saw the value in exclusively engaging multidisciplinary provider teams without involving the patient. Several barriers to effectively partnering with the patient in the decision-making process were identified, such as the lack of time and the need to concentrate on making medical teams work smoothly. DISCUSSION: Our investigation underlines how only a minority of trauma and emergency surgeons understand SDM, and perhaps, the value of SDM is not fully accepted in trauma and emergency situations. The inclusion of SDM practices in clinical guidelines may represent the most feasible and advocated solutions.
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.