Comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information vs usual care ‐ Summary of findings: Feeling uninformed subscale of Decisional conflict Scale (O'Connor 1995b) measured post‐consultation (Deschamps 2004)
It is very uncertain whether comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information changes feeling uninformed subscale of Decisional Conflict Scale (O'Connor… compared with usual care ‐ Summary of findings (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information vs usual care ‐ Summary of findings Feeling uninformed subscale of Decisional Conflict Scale (O'Connor 1995b): standardised scored 0‐100 (lower score indicates feeling more informed) measured post‐intervention and post‐consultation (Analysis 3.1). A fourth study (Col 2007) measured ... It is very uncertain whether comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information changes feeling uninformed subscale of Decisional Conflict Scale (O'Connor… compared with usual care ‐ Summary of findings (very low certainty). Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 212 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.