ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
General practitioners' perceptions on decision aids in healthcare: a qualitative study in Portugal.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evidence on Patient Decision Aids and Shared Decision-Making Across Breast Centers in Europe: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
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
backgroundDecision aids (DA) are evidence-based tools that support health-related decisions. Despite their recognised value, the use of DAs in primary care remains modest. In Portugal, clinical guidelines focus on clinical decision-making with minimal patient engagement. Adapting international DAs to the Portuguese context could be an efficient way to support the transition to shared decision-making. Understanding general practitioners' (GPs) awareness and perceptions of DAs is essential before evaluating their willingness to adopt these tools for specific clinical problems.
aimTo explore Portuguese GPs' perceptions of DAs and their implementation in primary care.
methodQualitative study with GPs and GP trainees in Portugal. Seven online focus groups were conducted with 33 GPs and GP trainees selected through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis.
resultsMost participants initially confused DAs with clinical decision support tools; only one recognised them as aids for shared decision-making. After clarification, GPs expressed favourable attitudes and believed that patients were willing to use DAs. Key barriers to adoption included limited funding, time constraints, and the lack of Portuguese translations. Facilitators involved system integration and localisation. Priority topics centred on prevention (screening, statin use, vaccines, contraception, lifestyle changes) and specific medications (antibiotics, hormone replacement, psychotropics).
conclusionAlthough unfamiliar to most participants, integrating DAs in primary care was well received, and these tools may provide added value in improving the quality of health decisions. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.