SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making for patients with cancer and health care providers based on the COM-B model: a systematic review.
Synthesis 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of Decision Aids on Decision Knowledge, Conflict, and Satisfaction Among Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of nursing management · 2026Pooled it
- Barriers and Facilitators to Shared Decision-Making in EGFRm Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Patient Perspectives.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for endometrial cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of response quality, reliability, and readability between ChatGPT and DeepSeek models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith advancements in cancer treatment approaches, patients face increasingly complex decisions regarding their care and treatment. Although Shared Decision-Making (SDM) can help patients make more informed and optimal choices, its development remains limited, and it has not been widely integrated into clinical practice. Identifying the barriers and facilitators to SDM from the perspective of patients and health care providers (HCPs) is essential. The Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B) provides a framework for understanding these factors.
objectiveThis review aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators of SDM between patients and HCPs on the basis of the COM-B and to identify key common and dual-effect factors.
methodsSeven databases were searched for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies. Data on the study design and key findings were extracted and analyzed guided by the COM-B model. The findings were reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Study quality was appraised via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
resultsA total of 6,811 papers were identified, 32 of which met the inclusion criteria. From these studies, 64 key barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of SDM from the perspective of patients and HCPs were extracted. These factors were systematically categorized according to the subcomponents of the COM-B model: physical capability (e.g, poor health status), psychological capability (e.g, inaccurate understanding of the disease), reflective motivation (e.g, conflicting goals), automatic motivation (e.g, fear of cancer), physical opportunity (e.g, supplemental resources), and social opportunity (e.g, good family support).
conclusionGuided by the COM-B model, this study identified factors associated with SDM among patients with cancer and HCPs. Further analysis revealed that some factors are shared by both groups; interventions targeting these common factors may produce simultaneous effects on patients and HCPs, offering more implementation value. Other factors exhibit dual characteristics, acting as both facilitators and barriers depending on the context. Future efforts should focus on exploring mechanisms to address such barriers into facilitators in specific clinical settings, thereby promoting the widespread implementation of SDM. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024568101).
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.