Development and usability testing of a web-based decision support for users and health professionals in psychiatric services.

Grim, Katarina; Rosenberg, David; Svedberg, Petra; Schön, Ulla‐Karin

doi:10.1037/prj0000278

Cited by 23 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The DST features separate, overlapping, web-based interfaces for user and provider, with full transparency between them. The development process and usability evaluation of the DST has been described in greater detail elsewhere (Grim et al, 2017). The purpose of using the DST is to increase user participation influencing the care planning process, as well as offering staff access to the user’s perceptions of their own needs, knowledge which can facilitate the decision-making process.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the research project, researchers, users, staff and service designers have worked together, a partnership which has generated knowledge regarding needs for support that can enable users to participate in their care (Grim, Rosenberg, Svedberg, & Schön, 2016) validated instruments for measuring SDM (Rosenberg, Svedberg, & Schön, 2015; Schön, Svedberg, & Rosenberg, 2015), as well as contributing to the development and validation of a digital interactive decision support tool, DST , for users in psychiatric care (Grim, Rosenberg, Svedberg, & Schön, 2017). The DST is based on the theoretical framework of SDM (Elwyn et al, 2012) and was adapted to the specific needs and preferences of users with mental health problems in a Swedish context (Grim et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study

Schön

Grim

Wallin

et al. 2018

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Shared decision making, SDM, in psychiatric services, supports users to experience a greater sense of involvement in treatment, self-efficacy, autonomy and reduced coercion. Decision tools adapted to the needs of users have the potential to support SDM and restructure how users and staff work together to arrive at shared decisions.The aim of this study was to describe and analyse the implementation process of an SDM intervention for users of psychiatric services in Sweden. Method: The implementation was studied through a process evaluation utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. In designing the process evaluation for the intervention, three evaluation components were emphasized: contextual factors, implementation issues and mechanisms of impact. Results: The study addresses critical implementation issues related to decision-making authority, the perceived decision-making ability of users and the readiness of the service to increase influence and participation. It also emphasizes the importance of facilitation, as well as suggesting contextual adaptations that may be relevant for the local organizations. Conclusion: The results indicate that staff perceived the decision support tool as user-friendly and useful in supporting participation in decision-making, and suggest that such concrete supports to participation can be a factor in implementation if adequate attention is paid to organizational contexts and structures.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study

Schön

Grim

Wallin

et al. 2018

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The data for this study are derived from the qualitative phases of a multi-phase project performed between 2014 and 2016. The aim of the project was to develop a supportive structure for SDM in the form of a decision support tool (DST) and supporting the implementation of SDM in the context of the Swedish mental healthcare system [16][17][18]. During the development and implementation of SDM, it became evident that the possibilities for user knowledge to be expressed and validated in the kind of joint deliberation that SDM requires were associated with several difficulties.…”

Section: Background Of the Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Legitimacy of User Knowledge in Decision-Making Processes in Mental Health Care: An Analysis of Epistemic Injustice

Grim

Tistad

Schön

et al. 2019

J. Psychosoc. Rehabil. Ment. Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experience-based knowledge of users is considered to provide vital input in shared decision making (SDM). However, mental health service users frequently express having negative experiences from meetings with providers, which are of an epistemic nature (e.g., being ignored or not regarded as credible). This study aimed to explore the barriers involved in legitimizing user knowledge in decision-making processes. Interview data from service users and providers were viewed from a theoretic framework of epistemic injustice. Abductive content analysis was conducted on data collected during a project to develop and implement SDM in mental health services. In describing obstacles to legitimize user knowledge, service users highlighted relational issues: being dependent, often dismissed and choosing to edit their testimonies. Service providers typically described workflow issues, users' insufficient decision-making competence and users' vulnerability to stress factors. The findings suggest that greater epistemic justice might be achieved by a SDM process in which the service user is engaged as a full partner in collaboration in various activities related to their care.

show abstract

“…Prior to implementing the DA for clinical decisions, it must be tested among patients making hypothetical decisions. We targeted a convenience sample of fifteen patients, reflecting an appropriate sample size for usability studies [35][36][37], as 80% of usability issues can be identified through 5-8 participants [28].…”

Section: Participants and Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guidelines recommend patients be informed of their incidental results (IR) when undergoing genomic sequencing (GS), yet there are limited tools to support patients' decisions about learning IR. The aim of this study is to develop and test the usability of a decision aid (DA) to guide patients' selection of IR, and to describe patients' preferences for learning IR following use of the DA. We developed and evaluated a DA using an iterative, mixed-methods process consisting of (1) prototype development, (2) feasibility testing, (3) cognitive interviews, (4) design and programming, and (5) usability testing. We created an interactive online DA called the Genomics ADvISER, a genomics decision AiD about Incidental SEquencing Results. The Genomics ADvISER begins with an educational whiteboard video, and then engages users in a values clarification exercise, knowledge quiz and final choice step, based on a 'binning' framework. Participants found the DA acceptable and intuitive to use. They were enthusiastic towards GS and IR; all selected multiple categories of IR. The Genomics ADvISER is a new patient-centered tool to support the clinical delivery of incidental GS results. The Genomics ADvISER fills critical care gaps, given the health care system's limited genomics expertise and capacity to convey the large volume of IR and their myriad of implications.

show abstract

Development and usability testing of a web-based decision support for users and health professionals in psychiatric services.

Cited by 23 publications

References 41 publications

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study

The Legitimacy of User Knowledge in Decision-Making Processes in Mental Health Care: An Analysis of Epistemic Injustice

The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About