2016
DOI: 10.1186/s13104-016-2164-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating the quality of shared decision making during the patient-carer encounter: a systematic review of tools

Abstract: BackgroundThe concept of shared decision making (SDM) has been developing in many countries since the 1990s. The main challenge of SDM, based on the principles of respect for the person’s autonomy, is to improve patients’ participation, should they so wish, in decisions concerning their personal health. To our knowledge, there is only one SDM evaluation tool validated in metropolitan French that does not measure the entire SDM construct. The aim of this review was to identify existing and validated SDM measure… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
45
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the number of RCTs was lower than those found by Wyatt (Wyatt et al, 2015) (25% vs. 18%, respectively). This review is also the first that uses the nine essential elements of the Makoul and Clayman (2006) integrative model, an acknowledged set of criteria in the SDM area, which are used in other studies (Bouniols, Leclère, & Moret, 2016). These criteria evaluate the six SDM approaches used in child and youth mental health, in order to make the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches qualitatively comparable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the number of RCTs was lower than those found by Wyatt (Wyatt et al, 2015) (25% vs. 18%, respectively). This review is also the first that uses the nine essential elements of the Makoul and Clayman (2006) integrative model, an acknowledged set of criteria in the SDM area, which are used in other studies (Bouniols, Leclère, & Moret, 2016). These criteria evaluate the six SDM approaches used in child and youth mental health, in order to make the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches qualitatively comparable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a premise for fulfilling the SDM process that the service facilitates and encourages the patient to bring individual perspectives into the process. To assess the extent and the quality of SDM several tools have been developed …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there is little or no consensus about the core set of measures and constructs for SDM in mental health, and the evidence available on the performance of published instruments is variable (Scholl et al 2011;Metz et al 2015;Bouniols et al 2016). In this sense, theory development on a set of core constructs to be measured is paramount.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%