Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37006454›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of social work2023

When opinions differ: the development of a reflection tool for youth professionals to support shared decision-making with parents.

Mariëlle Cloin, Jolanda Mathijssen, Eva Blaauw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of social work, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Mariëlle CloinTranzo, Tilburg University, Tilburg Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3386-4094
Jolanda MathijssenTranzo, Tilburg University, Tilburg Netherlands.
Eva BlaauwAvans University of Applied Science, Breda Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of shared decision-making (SDM) in youth care is increasingly emphasised. Professional reflection on the decision-making process is an important means to improve the use of SDM in practice. In this study, we report on the development of a reflection tool for youth professionals primarily to use when they hold a different opinion then parents about referral to specialised youth care services. In co-creation with local youth professionals and parent representatives from the South of the Netherlands, the tool was developed and tested in practice. This process was guided by a three-stage cyclical research project. First, reflective group discussions provided an initial understanding of professionals' needs, interests and experiences. This input then was analysed and documented into a draft tool with reflective questions. Next, this tool was tested on fictive and real life cases and adjusted with input from youth professionals and parents. This process resulted in an online reflection tool covering 16 overarching reflective questions to support youth professionals' reflection on their shared decision-making in practice. The tool can be used and adapted by others in the field of youth care to improve the process of making shared decisions with parents in complex cases.

Indexed as

parentsprofessionalsreflectionshared decision-makingYouth work

Identifiers

PMID37006454
PMCPMC10061805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.