SynthesisBMC health services research2024
A meta-ethnography of shared decision-making in mental health care from the perspective of staff and service users.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Jointly held care documents in child and adolescent mental health services: a systematic review.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- 'Knocking on the Door, Saying, "Can We Come in?"': Carers' Experiences of Engagement With Healthcare Workers in Inpatient Mental Health Services.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Stakeholder Perspectives on Power Transfer During Implementation of Psychiatric Self-Admission in Scandinavia: A Qualitative Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Empowering Collaboration With Patients: Healthcare Staff's Perspectives on Conditions for Shared Decision-Making in Swedish Psychiatric Care.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Exploring Admission Decisions in Psychiatrists in Emergency Services: A Vignette-based Qualitative Study.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2026Article
- Psychiatric nurses' understandings and attitudes toward the participation of patients with mental disorders in shared decision-making: a phenomenological study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living with Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2025Review
- Shared medication coordination in a social psychiatric residence: adaptation to meet local requirements.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman rights, recovery, and value-based approaches are integral to strategic changes and development in mental health care. Successfully integrating such person-centred values in mental health services requires a paradigm shift from traditional biomedical models of care to a more human rights-based approach. An important aspect of this is shared decision making (SDM) between mental health staff and service users. Whilst it is widely acknowledged SDM leads to improved outcomes, there are barriers and challenges to implementing this approach effectively in clinical practice.
objectivesThis systematic review aimed to assess existing empirical research exploring mental health service users and/or staff's attitudes towards and experiences of SDM in adult mental health care settings.
methodsThe review and protocol were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023369472). Systematic searches were run on four databases. Search terms pertained to studies reporting on mental health staff or service users' experiences of SDM in adult mental health care. Initial searches yielded 721 results. Included studies were analysed using a meta-ethnographic approach.
resultsThirteen articles were included. Data were synthesised using meta ethnographic synthesis, which produced four higher order themes with related subthemes; the role of service user ownership, the influence of fluctuating capacity, the importance of therapeutic alliance and changing clinicians' behaviours and attitudes. IMPLICATIONS: Both staff and service users found SDM to be an important factor in delivering high quality, effective mental health care. Despite this, participants had very little experience of implementing SDM in practice due to several personal, professional, and organisational challenges. This suggests that differences exist between what services strive towards achieving, and the experience of those implementing this in practice. These findings suggest that further research needs to be conducted to fully understand the barriers of implementing SDM in mental health services with training delivered to staff and service users about SDM.
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.