Question · asked by 1 review
Interventions for involving patients in decision‐making about their health care vs usual care: Patient involvement in decision‐making
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Shared decision‐making interventions vs usual care Participation (observations on the process of SDM) Observing Patient Involvement in shared decisiON‐making (OPTION; Elwyn 2005) assessed from video recording on the encounter (LeBlanc 2015). Core components of SDM: scoring the transcripts of conve... · people with mental health conditions Shared decision‐making interventions for people with mental health conditions (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 133 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared decision‐making interventions for people with mental health conditions 2022 · 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.