ArticlePloS one2026
Shared decision-making in pediatric physical therapy: A qualitative study among adolescents, parents, and physical therapists.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveShared Decision Making (SDM) is a collaborative process between patients and clinicians. A structured approach for SDM in pediatric physical therapy is lacking. This two-phase study aimed to 1) explore how and when to apply SDM in pediatric physical therapy in primary healthcare, and to identify barriers and facilitators influencing its use, and 2) adapt an SDM model for use in pediatric physical therapy and propose strategies for implementation.
methodsThe study consisted of two phases. In Phase 1, six focus groups were conducted, two per participant group: adolescents (12-18y, n = 11), parents of children (4-18y, n = 9), and pediatric physical therapists (n = 6). A qualitative survey among 46 pediatric physical therapists validated focus group results. An inductive analysis explored how and when SDM should be applied, and a deductive analysis identified barriers and facilitators by linking codes to Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains. In Phase 2, the research team integrated results into an existing goal-based SDM-model, and implementation strategies were selected using the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change tool.
resultsSDM can begin at intake and goal setting, with ongoing, individualized involvement of children and parents throughout therapy. When comparing therapy options, treatment frequency, duration, homework, expectations, and possibilities at home can be discussed. Barriers included time constraints and the challenge of balancing multiple perspectives, while facilitators were the possibility to adapt SDM conversations per family and a supportive practice culture. A goal-based SDM-model was adapted for pediatric physical therapy. Implementation strategies identified were professional training, use of SDM tools, sufficient contact with parents, time to learn SDM, a supportive team culture, and empowering parents and children. DISCUSSION: This study provides guidelines for implementing SDM in pediatric physical therapy in primary care. A multifaceted implementation approach, guided by this study's implementation strategies, may enhance SDM integration into clinical practice.
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.