Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386464›Full record

ArticleBMC nephrology2023

Healthcare professional education in shared decision making in the context of chronic kidney disease: a scoping review.

Björn Meijers, Karolien Wellekens, Marco Montomoli, Karmela Altabas, Jessica Geter, Kate McCarthy, Thierry Lobbedez, Rumeyza Kazancioglu, Nicola Thomas

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nephrology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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

9 authors.

Björn MeijersDepartment of Nephrology, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, UZ Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. bjorn.meijers@uzleuven.be.
Karolien WellekensDepartment of Nephrology, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, UZ Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Marco MontomoliDepartment of Nephrology, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valencia, Spain.
Karmela AltabasDepartment of Nephrology and Dialysis, UC Sisters of Mercy, Zagreb, Croatia.
Jessica GeterBaxter Healthcare Corp, Deerfield, IL, USA.
Kate McCarthyBaxter Healthcare Ltd, Compton, UK.
Thierry LobbedezDepartment of Nephrology, University Hospitals of Caen, Caen, France.
Rumeyza KazanciogluDepartment of Nephrology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Türkiye, Turkey.
Nicola ThomasLondon South Bank University, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE &

objectiveShared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative effort between healthcare professionals, individuals with CKD whereby clinical evidence, expected outcomes and potential side-effects are balanced with individual values and beliefs to provide the best mutually decided treatment option. Meaningful SDM is supported by effective training and education. We aimed to identify the available evidence on SDM training and education of healthcare professionals caring for people with chronic kidney disease. We aimed to identify existing training programs and to explore what means are used to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of these educational efforts. METHODOLOGY: We performed a scoping review to study the effectiveness of training or education about shared decision making of healthcare professionals treating patients with kidney disease. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL and APA PsycInfo were searched.

resultsAfter screening of 1190 articles, 24 articles were included for analysis, of which 20 were suitable for quality appraisal. These included 2 systematic reviews, 1 cohort study, 7 qualitative studies, and 10 studies using mixed methods. Study quality was varied with high quality (n = 5), medium quality (n = 12), and low quality (n = 3) studies. The majority of studies (n = 11) explored SDM education for nurses, and physicians (n = 11). Other HCP profiles included social workers (n = 6), dieticians (n = 4), and technicians (n = 2). Topics included education on SDM in withholding of dialysis, modality choice, patient engagement, and end-of-life decisions. LIMITATIONS: We observed significant heterogeneity in study design and varied quality of the data. As the literature search is restricted to evidence published between January 2000 and March 2021, relevant literature outside of this time window has not been taken into account.

conclusionsEvidence on training and education of SDM for healthcare professionals taking care of patients with CKD is limited. Curricula are not standardized, and educational and training materials do not belong to the public domain. The extent to which interventions have improved the process of shared-decision making is tested mostly by pre-post testing of healthcare professionals, whereas the impact from the patient perspective for the most part remains untested.

Indexed as

Education, ProfessionalRenal Insufficiency, ChronicCohort StudiesDecision Making, SharedHumansPatient ParticipationRenal Dialysis

Identifiers

PMID37386464
PMCPMC10308615

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.