Article
Critical Care Medicine
Shawn P. E. Nishi, Lisa M. Lowenstein, Tito R. Mendoza, Maria A. Lopez, Laura C. Crocker, Karen Sepucha, Jiangong Niu, Robert J. Volk
Summary: Among patients recently assessed for LCS, the quality of decision-making is highly variable, with patients valuing early cancer detection over concerns about harms. Patients were more likely to receive information on the benefits of LCS than on the risks, and one-third experienced some degree of decisional conflict. However, most patients felt they were adequately involved in the screening decision-making process.
Article
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Xuan Zhu, Emily Weiser, Debra J. Jacobson, Joan M. Griffin, Paul J. Limburg, Lila J. Finney Rutten
Summary: This study examined patient preferences and factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision-making among screening-eligible US adults. Most respondents preferred a collaborative process of decision-making, although variations existed across different subgroups. It is important for healthcare providers to assess patients' values and preferences and involve them in the decision-making process at a level they are comfortable with.
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
(2022)
Review
Oncology
Marta Maes-Carballo, Manuel Garcia-Garcia, Yolanda Gomez-Fandino, Carlos Roberto Estrada-Lopez, Andres Iglesias-Alvarez, Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas, Khalid Saeed Khan
Summary: This study aimed to evaluate the quality of shared decision-making (SDM) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs). The results showed that SDM was mentioned in less than half of the guidelines, and the quality was suboptimal with scarce recommendations. Guideline developers should incorporate evidence-based SDM recommendations to bridge the gap between evidence and practice.
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
(2022)
Article
Oncology
Naomi Q. P. Tan, Shawn P. E. Nishi, Lisa M. Lowenstein, Tito R. Mendoza, Maria A. Lopez-Olivo, Laura C. Crocker, Karen R. Sepucha, Robert J. Volk
Summary: The study found that a better shared decision-making (SDM) process was associated with improved affective-cognitive outcomes among patients screened for lung cancer. Patients with higher SDM process scores showed greater knowledge of lung cancer screening, less decisional conflict, and increased intentions to adhere to screening recommendations and undergo screening again.
Article
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Simon John Stewart, Lisa Roberts, Lucy Brindle
Summary: This study examines how treatment-related preferences expressed by patients with prostate cancer and their partners are organized during clinical consultations. It found that when clinicians did not align with patients' preferences, it caused discordance in the interaction and led to couples silencing themselves. However, two deviant cases were identified where collaboration was maintained. Therefore, clinicians should acknowledge and create opportunities for discussing treatment preferences by recognizing the contributions of patients and their partners.
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
(2023)
Article
Transplantation
Laura J. James, Germaine Wong, Allison Tong, Jonathan C. Craig, Kirsten Howard, Martin Howell
Summary: For cancer screening in CKD patients, important attributes include early detection, decreased risk of cancer-related death, false negatives, reduction in immunosuppression, and non-invasive interventions following detection. Patient preferences are influenced by the stage of CKD, with transplant recipients focusing more on immunosuppression reduction and views of family/friends, while dialysis patients prioritize screening frequency and overdiagnosis of harmless cancers.
NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION
(2022)
Article
Immunology
Edward R. Cachay, Tari Gilbert, Robert Deiss, Wm Christopher Mathews
Summary: This study investigated the risk of anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (aHSIL) among people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) using anal cytology data. The study found that the probability of having aHSIL varied depending on patient characteristics. A risk prediction nomogram was developed to facilitate shared decision-making conversations concerning anal cancer screening.
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
(2023)
Article
Medicine, General & Internal
Anna Selva, Pilar Lopez, Teresa Puig, Francesc Macia, Clara Selva, Yolanda Alvarez-Perez, Rebeca Terraza, Andrea Buron, Salvador Tarek Machlab, Carles Pericay, Ivan Sola, Nuria Tora, Vanesa Rodriguez, Cristina Barrufet, Anna Aymar, Marisa Bare
Summary: This study aims to assess the experience, satisfaction and participation in decision-making of participants in a CRC screening programme and of patients diagnosed with CRC through this programme in relation to the diagnostic and therapeutic processes of cancer.
Article
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Shelby R. Sferra, Joyce S. Cheng, Zachary Boynton, Verdi DiSesa, Larry R. Kaiser, Grace X. Ma, Cherie P. Erkmen
Summary: This study compared the efficacy of two shared decision making aids for lung cancer screening and found that both Option Grids and Shouldiscreen.com facilitated a meaningful SDM process. Patients using Option Grids experienced decreased decision regret and enhanced knowledge of potential complications, while patients using Shouldiscreen.com had less knowledge regarding potential complications and increased regret regarding their decision to pursue screening.
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
(2021)
Article
Health Care Sciences & Services
Judith M. E. Walsh, Leah Karliner, Ashley Smith, Yan Leykin, Steven E. Gregorich, Jennifer Livaudais-Toman, Ana I. Velazquez, Margaret Lowenstein, Celia P. Kaplan
Summary: This pilot study developed a tool called LungCARE to guide eligible primary care patients in making lung cancer screening decisions. The results showed that patients who used LungCARE were more likely to discuss screening with their physicians, be referred to screening, and complete the screening.
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
(2023)
Article
Psychiatry
Zhuo-Ran Chen, Li Zhang, Ya-Wei Chen, Meng-Yang Xu, Hang Jia, Meng-Ying Li, Yu-Han Lou, Ling Lan
Summary: Shared decision-making is a scientific and rational model for decision-making. Whether physicians choose this model is influenced by various factors, and it is unclear whether the strained doctor-patient relationship affects their choice. A survey showed that most physicians perceived the doctor-patient relationship as poor or strained, however, this did not significantly impact their preference for shared decision-making.
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY
(2022)
Article
Medical Informatics
Yan Liu, Rachel Kornfield, Ellie Fan Yang, Elizabeth Burnside, Jon Keevil, Dhavan V. V. Shah
Summary: This study examines how patterns of verbal communication and system use of a decision aid predict patients' satisfaction with shared decision making for screening mammography. The results suggest that providers' use of quantitative language and patients' question-asking are associated with different levels of satisfaction, and looping through the decision aid improves satisfaction.
BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING
(2022)
Review
Oncology
Deborah Jael Herrera, Wessel van de Veerdonk, Neamin M. Berhe, Sarah Talboom, Marlon van Loo, Andrea Ruiz Alejos, Allegra Ferrari, Guido Van Hal
Summary: This research aimed to understand the effectiveness of shared decision-making tools for cancer screening and explored the preferences of vulnerable people and clinicians regarding the specific characteristics of these tools. The findings showed that these tools were more effective for vulnerable populations and that preferences varied between patients and clinicians. Collaboration and effective communication between patients and clinicians are important for improving the development and use of these tools.
Article
Health Care Sciences & Services
Tao Sun, Hanlin Chen, Yuan Gao, Yingru Xiang, Feng Wang, Ziling Ni, Xiaohe Wang, Xianhong Huang
Summary: This study examines inpatients' preferences for participating in medical decision-making and identifies the factors' rankings in terms of importance, as well as whether they vary for different patients. The study utilizes Case 1 best-worst scaling and identifies 13 attributes influencing inpatient medical decision-making participation through literature review and interviews. The findings show that the most important factors are patients' trust in physicians, physicians' professional expertise, and physicians' attitudes. The study highlights the significant heterogeneity in patients' preferences for shared decision-making and suggests the need for further research on improving patient participation.
Article
Psychiatry
Elizabeth B. B. Matthews, Margot Savoy, Anuradha Paranjape, Diana Washington, Treanna Hackney, Danielle Galis, Yaara Zisman-Ilani
Summary: The study found that underserved patients with depression prefer to have a high level of shared decision making, and desire to play an active role in their treatment. Patients prefer collaborating with doctors during the information sharing process, but also want control over the final decisional outcome. Trust between patients and providers is critical for effective shared decision making.
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY
(2021)