SynthesisMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2025
The Effect of Patient Decision Aid Attributes on Patient Outcomes: A Network Meta-Analysis of a Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shared Decision-Making in the Management of Deep Partial-Thickness Burns: Development and Implementation of a Multicomponent Decision Aid.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- An individualized patient decision-making tool to improve decision making in non-small cell lung cancer: a mixed methods approach.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of decision aids on decisional conflict and treatment or disease knowledge among women diagnosed with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Updated International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS version 5.0): modified Delphi, evidence informed consensus process.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Shared decision making using digital twins in knee osteoarthritis care: a randomized clinical trial of an AI-enabled decision aid versus education alone on decision quality, physical function, and user experience.EClinicalMedicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundPatient decision aids (PtDAs) are effective interventions to help people participate in health care decisions. Although there are quality standards, PtDAs are complex interventions with variability in their attributes.PurposeTo determine and compare the effects of PtDA attributes (e.g., content elements, delivery timing, development) on primary outcomes for adults facing health care decisions.Data SourcesA systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PtDAs to usual care.Study SelectionEligible RCTs measured at least 1 primary outcome: informed values choice, knowledge, accurate risk perception, decisional conflict subscales, and undecided.Data AnalysisA network meta-analysis evaluated direct and indirect effects of PtDA attributes on primary outcomes.Data SynthesisOf 209 RCTs, 149 reported eligible outcomes. There was no difference in outcomes for PtDAs using implicit compared with explicit values clarification. Compared with PtDAs with probabilities, PtDAs without probabilities were associated with poorer patient knowledge (mean difference [MD] -3.86; 95% credible interval [CrI] -7.67, -0.03); there were no difference for other outcomes. There was no difference in outcomes when PtDAs presented information in ways that decrease cognitive demand and mixed results when PtDAs used strategies to enhance communication. Compared with PtDAs delivered in preparation for consultations, PtDAs used during consultations were associated with poorer knowledge (MD -4.34; 95% CrI -7.24, -1.43) and patients feeling more uninformed (MD 5.07; 95% CrI 1.06, 9.11). Involving patients in PtDA development was associated with greater knowledge (MD 6.56; 95% CrI 1.10, 12.03) compared with involving health care professionals alone.LimitationsThere were no direct comparisons between PtDAs with/without attributes.ConclusionsImprovements in knowledge were influenced by some PtDA content elements, using PtDA content before the consultation, and involving patients in development. There were few or no differences on other outcomes.HighlightsThis is the first known network meta-analysis conducted to determine the contributions of the different attributes of patient decision aids (PtDAs) on patient outcomes.There was no difference in outcomes when PtDAs used implicit compared with explicit values clarification.There were greater improvements in knowledge when PtDAs included information on probabilities, PtDAs were used in preparation for the consultation or development included patients on the research team.There was no difference in outcomes when PtDAs presented information in ways that decrease cognitive demand and mixed results when PtDAs used strategies to enhance communication.
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.