ArticleBMC primary care2025
Development of a patient decision aid for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a patient-centered approach.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meaningful engagement of lived experience in diabetes research and health service improvement: A rapid review of barriers to and enablers for community involvement among adults with type 2 diabetes.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Review
- Development of a Web-Based Multimedia Patient Decision Aid for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A User-Centered Design.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient decision aids (PDAs) can effectively facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and healthcare professionals. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration created a model for the systematic development of PDAs. However, the absence of a solid evidence base limits practical recommendations for best practices. For example, uncertainties exist about the most appropriate method for identifying the needs and preferences of patients and healthcare professionals. This study aims to detail the development process for the development of a PDA for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), using the IPDAS model.
methodsFrom September 2020 to February 2023, we systematically developed the PDA for T2DM in the Netherlands. We adopted a patient-centered approach by researching patient considerations and actively collaborating with a multidisciplinary steering group, including patients with T2DM, patient organizations, and healthcare professionals. The PDA content and prototype development were determined by incorporating patients' needs and preferences, input from the steering group, and available evidence regarding T2DM treatment options. The research team and steering group iteratively reviewed the PDA prototype.
resultsA web-based PDA was developed consisting of five sections: 1) information about T2DM and the available treatment options; 2) comparison of treatment options; 3) questions to assess patients' knowledge; 4) value-clarification exercise; and 5) summary of the patient's journey through the PDA. Before patients use the PDA, healthcare professionals can preselect the most relevant treatment options.
conclusionsEarly and iterative involvement of relevant stakeholders in the development process of the PDA helped the alignment of the PDA with the needs and preferences of the diverse end-users. In a future study, we will investigate the effectiveness of the PDA in facilitating SDM in T2DM care.
trial registrationInternational Clinical Trials Registry Platform ID: NL8948, date of registration: 05-10-2020.
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.