Observational studyAcademic pediatrics
Characterizing How Pediatric Clinicians Create Choice Awareness When Performing Shared Decision-Making.
Observational study in Academic pediatrics. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo characterize how clinicians create choice awareness when performing shared decision-making (SDM).
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional observational study designed to characterize the decision-making processes of parents and clinicians across a range of medical decisions in different pediatric settings. For the observational study, clinicians were recruited from 6 pediatric specialties (craniofacial, hematology and oncology, hospital medicine, neonatology, pulmonary, and sports medicine) at a single US children's hospital. We videotaped inpatient care conferences and outpatient problem-oriented encounters. We then conducted individual postencounter interviews with parents and clinicians about the decisions they made in those encounters. For the secondary analysis, we identified all videotaped encounters that included a decision in which the clinician stated in their postencounter interview that there were multiple options and they were performing SDM. With this sample, we used conversation analysis to characterize how clinicians created choice awareness.
resultsThere were 34 shared decisions from 21 videotaped encounters included in analysis. We found 2 overarching approaches clinicians used to create choice awareness: 1) presenting 1 option and recommending it as the next step in management without making other options explicit, though allowing those options to emerge as needed (single-option approach), or 2) making it explicit up-front that there were multiple options (multiple-options approach). Though both approaches could facilitate SDM, the multiple-options approach does so most unambiguously.
conclusionsThere is variation in how pediatric clinicians create choice awareness, an essential element of SDM. Further standardization of communicating choice awareness can improve implementation of SDM.
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.