Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39625898›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Visual decision aids to support communication and shared decision-making: How are they valued and used in practice?

Janneke Noordman, Désanne Noordam, Jorien van Treeck, Karen Prantl, Patricia Pennings, Petra Borsje, Maud Heinen, Yvette Emond, Ester Rake, Gudule Boland and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

11 authors.

Janneke NoordmanNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4344-7534
Désanne NoordamNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jorien van TreeckPharos, Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Karen PrantlDutch Kidney Patients Association (NVN), Bussum, The Netherlands.
Patricia PenningsNational Association ReumaZorg Nederland (RZN), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Petra BorsjeNational Association ReumaZorg Nederland (RZN), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maud HeinenDepartment of IQ Health, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Yvette EmondDepartment of IQ Health, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ester RakeDepartment of IQ Health, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2262-3818
Gudule BolandPharos, Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sandra van DulmenNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unknown how visual decision aids support communication and shared decision-making in everyday clinical practice, and how they are perceived by patients with varying levels of health literacy and their healthcare providers. Recently, three visual decision aids have been developed for renal replacement treatment, osteoarthritis of the knee, and osteoarthritis of the hip. This study aims to explore how patients and healthcare providers use and value these visual decision aids.

methodsThe evaluation of the visual decision aids was performed by coding video-recorded outpatient consultations (n = 35), by conducting reflective practice interviews with healthcare providers (n = 9), and through interviews with patients (n = 29). Consultations were coded using the 5-item OPTION instrument to measure shared decision-making, and self-developed items based on the visual decision aids and user guide.

resultsBoth healthcare providers and patients valued the use of the visual decision aids, especially the overview page with all treatment options. Accordingly, it was observed that most providers mainly used the overview page. However, providers in nephrology discussed the individual treatment pages more often than providers in osteoarthritis care. This study also showed that most providers were unfamiliar with the user guide for the visual decision aids.

conclusionVisual decision aids for nephrology and osteoarthritis care seem particularly useful for patients with limited health literacy. Healthcare providers in this study mainly used the overview page of the visual decision aids. Although this is valued by both providers and patients, it is also important to discuss the individual treatment pages, including the pros and cons, with patients. This study also points to differences between outpatient clinics or departments in the use and implementation of the visual decision aids. The visual decision aids for osteoarthritis are used to a limited extent. In nephrology clinics, the visual decision aid is implemented.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesAdultAgedAudiovisual AidsFemaleHealth LiteracyHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Participation

Identifiers

PMID39625898
PMCPMC11614201

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.