Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39370449›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2025

Decision-making for children and adolescents: a scoping review of interventions increasing participation in decision-making.

Inga Bosch, Hermann Siebel, Maike Heiser, Laura Inhestern

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Observational
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

4 authors.

Inga BoschDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Hermann SiebelDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Maike HeiserDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Laura InhesternDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. l.inhestern@uke.de.

Funding

Projekt DEAL
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo review and synthesize the literature on interventions to facilitate shared decision-making or to increase participation in decision-making in pediatrics focusing on interventions for children and adolescents.

methodsWe systematically searched three electronic databases (September 2021, update in September 2022). We included studies that aimed to increase involvement of children and adolescents in medical or treatment decisions, regardless of study design and reported outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the MMAT. The synthesis strategy followed a narrative methodology.

results21 studies met the inclusion criteria. Interventions aimed to increase participation by provision of information, encouraging active participation and collaboration. Didactic strategies included digital interactive applications (n = 12), treatment protocols and guiding questions (n = 12), questionnaires or quizzes about patients' condition or their knowledge (n = 8), visual aids (n = 4), and educational courses (n = 1). Findings indicate positive effects on some of the investigated outcomes. However, the heterogeneity of studies made it difficult to draw consistent conclusions about the effectiveness of interventions.

conclusionsInterventions used a variety of approaches to facilitate SDM and increase participation. The findings suggest that interventions have inconsistent effects across different outcome variables. The evidence was limited due to the methodological shortcomings of the included studies. IMPACT: To increase the participation of children and adolescents in decision-making, interventions targeting them are needed. Most intervention focus on the provision of information and encouragement for active participation. The results suggest high feasibility and, mostly, positive effects in participation, health-related knowledge, patient-HCP relationship, and adherence The study highlights that further high-quality studies using similar outcome parameters are needed to investigate the effects of interventions to facilitate participation in decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDecision Making, SharedPatient ParticipationAdolescentChildHumans

Identifiers

PMID39370449
PMCPMC12122360

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.