Comparing the use of Arabic decision aid to usual care

BackgroundDecision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a healthcare provider to help patients prepare to actively participate in making a health decision. 'Healthcare providers' are considered to be all people who are engaged in actions whose primary intent is to protect and improve health (e.g. nurses, doctors, pharmacists, social workers, health support workers such as peer health workers).Little is known about the e ectiveness of decision coaching. ObjectivesTo determine the e ects of decision coaching (I) for people facing healthcare decisions for themselves or a family member (P) compared to (C) usual care or evidence-based intervention only, on outcomes (O) related to preparation for decision making, decisional needs and potential adverse e ects.

show abstract

Impact of shared decision making on healthcare in recent literature: a scoping review using a novel taxonomy

Wehking

Debrouwere

Danner³

et al. 2023

J Public Health (Berl.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Numerous articles and reviews discussed the effects of shared decision making (SDM) on concept-specific and direct outcomes, showing great variety in methodology and results. Objectives This scoping review accentuates effects of shared decision making interventions on more distal and distant outcomes related to the healthcare experience of patients and physicians, the economy and treatment parameters. Eligibility criteria The search considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs), their secondary analyses and follow-up reports comparing shared decision making interventions against control conditions. Sources of evidence MEDLINE (through PubMed) and reference lists of included articles were systematically appraised. Charting methods First, relevant outcome effects were extracted following the authors’ conclusions. Second, all outcomes were sorted into one of five different effect levels: individual, interactional, organizational, systemic and clinical. Results The search process identified 120 eligible reports, representing 116 randomized controlled trials and four follow-up reports with a variety in research topics, intervention types, outcome measurements and effects. Most of the 298 extracted outcomes were reported as not affected by shared decision making (204). While some outcomes improved at least slightly (83), few tended to decline (9) or revealed mixed results (2). Considering the five outcome effect levels, individual and clinical outcomes were reported more frequently than interactional, organizational and systemic ones. However, many individual outcomes could be counted as systemic and vice versa. Conclusions Shared decision making can improve distal and distant outcomes depending on the healthcare context. Individual, systemic and clinical outcomes have been more frequently appraised than interactional and organizational ones. Single database search and limited assessment of articles’ risk of bias and effect size narrow reliability of our results.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Comparing the use of Arabic decision aid to usual care

Abstract: Objectives: To evaluate the effect of decision aids)DAs(for metastatic colorectal cancer)mCRC(patients in the Arabic language. Methods: A multi-centered randomized control trial was used to evaluate the effect of Arabic DA use with usual care for mCRC patients compared to usual care alone.

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions

Impact of shared decision making on healthcare in recent literature: a scoping review using a novel taxonomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About