ReviewUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[Shared decision making-strengthening patient-physiciant relations through joint deliberation].
Review in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this article is to present shared decision making as a practical concept for urology. It describes a communication process in which patients and physicians share their respective perspective and expertise in order to jointly make an informed decision that is suitable for the individual patient. This makes it an important component of person-centered healthcare and is demanded by many patients and healthcare policy makers. Shared decision making can have a positive impact on patient knowledge and satisfaction. In urology, there are numerous decision-making situations in which shared decision making is indicated. At the same time, it is unclear how often shared decision making takes place in routine urological care and there are barriers to implementation on the part of physicians, patients and the organizational and system level. An appropriate attitude and communication skills as well as an awareness of the preference-sensitive decisions to be made are important prerequisites for shared decision making. Approaches such as the "Three Talks" model can be used to guide consultations. In addition, other measures such as patient decision aids, patient activation strategies, and training for physicians can support shared decision making in practice. Targeted approaches and reliable implementation in routine care will be important topics for the future of shared decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40689968What 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.