ArticleBMJ open2026
Shared decision making in pain care: a systematic review study protocol of decision aids.
Article in BMJ open, 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
introductionShared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an ethical imperative and essential to patient-centred care. SDM is particularly useful when several preference-sensitive treatment options exist and in the setting of chronic conditions or longitudinal management. Chronic pain management embodies these characteristics, yet SDM often remains insufficient in this population. Decision aids are designed to facilitate SDM by helping patients and clinicians understand treatment options, clarify patient values, and guide collaborative decision processes. Despite their importance, the use of decision aids in pain management is inconsistent and their reported effectiveness has been variable. However, the current landscape of decision aids for pain management has not been described. This lack of understanding of what tools exist, how they are structured, what decisions they address and how they were developed makes it difficult to advance implementation efforts or identify meaningful gaps in available resources. As such, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify and characterise decision aids for pain management across the lifespan. Specifically, this review will describe the clinical decisions addressed, decision aid structures and delivery formats, development processes and outcomes used to evaluate the impact of existing decision aids. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL and Ovid Embase from inception through January 2026. Studies will be assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data will be extracted and presented with the aim of describing the: (a) content and structures of pain-related decision aids, (b) development processes used to create existing pain-related decision aids and (c) outcome measures used to evaluate the impact of decision aids in clinical care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethics approval. Findings will be disseminated to clinicians, researchers and patients through journal publications, conference presentations and in collaboration with patient partners. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251085288.
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.