Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

A systematic review of assessment instruments used in studies on shared decision making

View through CrossRef
Shared decision making (SDM) is a model of communication processes that facilitate cooperative decision making between a patient and medical practitioner regarding treatment. The use of assessment instruments is an important way to gain insight into the practice of SDM. In order to fully utilize the various assessment tools available for use, it is important to not only reveal what instruments are used to measure SDM but also shed light on which aspects of SDM are captured by different instruments. However, the instruments currently used to measure SDM are unclear, as are the aspects of SDM processes each instrument reflects. So that, we reviewed assessment instruments used in studies on SDM with the aim of clarifying what aspects of SDM processes each instrument was intended to capture in this study. As a result, we identified 16 assessment instruments used in 115 articles concerning SDM as the main theme. The most commonly used instrument was the OPTION scale, followed by SDM-Q-9. Step 4 (“informing on the benefits and risks of the options”) was covered by most instruments, followed by Step 5 (“investigation of the patient’s understanding and expectations”). In the future, assessment instruments for SDM will likely be used primarily in areas in which there is considerable uncertainty about evidence, and where multiple options exist. When you assess SDM, it is necessary to be able to select the evaluation indicator that suits the purpose.
Title: A systematic review of assessment instruments used in studies on shared decision making
Description:
Shared decision making (SDM) is a model of communication processes that facilitate cooperative decision making between a patient and medical practitioner regarding treatment.
The use of assessment instruments is an important way to gain insight into the practice of SDM.
In order to fully utilize the various assessment tools available for use, it is important to not only reveal what instruments are used to measure SDM but also shed light on which aspects of SDM are captured by different instruments.
However, the instruments currently used to measure SDM are unclear, as are the aspects of SDM processes each instrument reflects.
So that, we reviewed assessment instruments used in studies on SDM with the aim of clarifying what aspects of SDM processes each instrument was intended to capture in this study.
As a result, we identified 16 assessment instruments used in 115 articles concerning SDM as the main theme.
The most commonly used instrument was the OPTION scale, followed by SDM-Q-9.
Step 4 (“informing on the benefits and risks of the options”) was covered by most instruments, followed by Step 5 (“investigation of the patient’s understanding and expectations”).
In the future, assessment instruments for SDM will likely be used primarily in areas in which there is considerable uncertainty about evidence, and where multiple options exist.
When you assess SDM, it is necessary to be able to select the evaluation indicator that suits the purpose.

Related Results

Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash Abstract This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
This review summarizes the evidence from six randomized controlled trials that judged the effectiveness of systematic review summaries on policymakers' decision making, or the most...
Piece by piece: Collaborative mosaic-making for inclusive policy development
Piece by piece: Collaborative mosaic-making for inclusive policy development
This report sets out the findings from one of four projects commissioned by Wellcome Policy Lab to pilot creative approaches to policy development. In this project, Scientia Script...
Cash‐based approaches in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review
Cash‐based approaches in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review
This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness, efficiency and implementation of cash transfers in humanitarian settings. The review summarises evidence from five studi...
Instruments for Evaluating Shared Medical Decision Making
Instruments for Evaluating Shared Medical Decision Making
The author conducted a structured literature review of instruments for evaluating shared medical decision making. She included relevant instruments that were generalizable beyond s...
Microwave Ablation with or Without Chemotherapy in Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
Microwave Ablation with or Without Chemotherapy in Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction  Microwave ablation (MWA) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment for patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, whether it i...
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Abstract The rapid growth of open access publishing (OAP) has significantly improved the accessibility and dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, this expansion has also c...

Back to Top