Scoping review indicates heterogeneous methods for developing and integrating patient decision aids in the context of clinical practice guidelines
Rattachement africain : de, co, gb, cn, es, au, hr, nl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: To review the methods used to develop and integrate patient decision aids (PDAs) based on the recommendations of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a scoping review covering bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase; searched until December 2023), gray literature, references, and expert consultations to identify eligible documents. Documents published from 2000 onwards and describing methods related to guideline-based PDA development or linking CPGs and PDAs were included. Two reviewers independently selected and analyzed the documents. Results were synthesized and presented narratively. RESULTS: Based on 24 included documents, we categorized their methods into 4 topics. For topic (1), the selection of CPG recommendations for which PDAs are (most) needed, we found a total of 14 selection factors across n = 11 documents, with uncertainty/variability in patient preferences and trade-offs between options being the most frequently mentioned. Topic (2) (n = 24) covers methods for developing and/or updating guideline-based PDAs, such as forming a multidisciplinary development group, using CPGs and their evidence summaries along with other sources as the evidence base, and using digital solutions for semi-automated development and updating. Topic (3) (n = 12) covers methods for PDA quality assessment and/or user testing, such as finalizing and approving the PDAs after a review and feedback process from the CPG group and an iterative user testing process. Topic (4) (n = 20) covers methods for linking CPGs and PDAs, often through digital strategies. CONCLUSION: We identified heterogeneous methods for developing and integrating PDAs based on CPG recommendations. Empirical testing is required to determine the most useful and practically feasible (combination of) methods. CPG organizations should focus on establishing adequate methods for linking CPG and PDA development to foster shared decision-making.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Scoping review indicates heterogeneous methods for developing and integrating patient decision aids in the context of clinical practice guidelines
- Date Crossref
- 01/05/2025
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein National Competency Center for Shared Decision Making pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
University of Lübeck pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
German Agency for Quality in Medicine pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisation à but non lucratif
-
Clinical Research Services pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Universidad de Antioquia pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
-
Sichuan University Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
West China Hospital of Sichuan University pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Complejo Hospitalario de Ourense pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
The University of Adelaide pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Servicio Canario de la Salud pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, National Competency Center for Shared Decision Making — University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein et University of Lübeck, avec 9 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.