Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.
Agbadjé, Titilayo Tatiana; Riganti, Paula; Adisso, Évèhouénou Lionel; Adekpedjou, Rhéda; Boucher, Alexandrine; Nunciaroni, Andressa Teoli; Franco, Juan Victor Ariel; Yanzi, Maria Victoria Ruiz; Légaré, France.
Afiliação
  • Agbadjé TT; Centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne de l'Université Laval (CERSSPL-UL), Quebec, Canada.
  • Riganti P; Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation, Université Laval, Quebec, Québec, Canada.
  • Adisso ÉL; Family and Community Medicine Division, Hospital Italiano, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Adekpedjou R; Research Department, Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Boucher A; Centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne de l'Université Laval (CERSSPL-UL), Quebec, Canada.
  • Nunciaroni AT; Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation, Université Laval, Quebec, Québec, Canada.
  • Franco JVA; Centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne de l'Université Laval (CERSSPL-UL), Quebec, Canada.
  • Yanzi MVR; Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation, Université Laval, Quebec, Québec, Canada.
  • Légaré F; Centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne de l'Université Laval (CERSSPL-UL), Quebec, Canada.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0265401, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35294494
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Interventions to change health professionals' behaviour are often difficult to replicate. Incomplete reporting is a key reason and a source of waste in health research. We aimed to assess the reporting of shared decision making (SDM) interventions.

METHODS:

We extracted data from a 2017 Cochrane systematic review whose aim was to determine the effectiveness of interventions to increase the use of SDM by healthcare professionals. In a secondary analysis, we used the 12 items of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to analyze quantitative data. We used a conceptual framework for implementation fidelity to analyze qualitative data, which added details to various TIDieR items (e.g. under "what materials?" we also reported on ease of access to materials). We used SAS 9.4 for all analyses.

RESULTS:

Of the 87 studies included in the 2017 Cochrane review, 83 were randomized trials, three were non-randomized trials, and one was a controlled before-and-after study. Items most completely reported were "brief name" (87/87, 100%), "why" (rationale) (86/87, 99%), and "what" (procedures) (81/87, 93%). The least completely reported items (under 50%) were "materials" (29/87, 33%), "who" (23/87, 26%), and "when and how much" (18/87, 21%), as well as the conditional items "tailoring" (8/87, 9%), "modifications" (3/87, 4%), and "how well (actual)" (i.e. delivered as planned?) (3/87, 3%). Interventions targeting patients were better reported than those targeting health professionals or both patients and health professionals, e.g. 84% of patient-targeted intervention studies reported "How", (delivery modes), vs. 67% for those targeting health professionals and 32% for those targeting both. We also reported qualitative analyses for most items. Overall reporting of items for all interventions was 41.5%.

CONCLUSIONS:

Reporting on all groups or components of SDM interventions was incomplete in most SDM studies published up to 2017. Our results provide guidance for authors on what elements need better reporting to improve the replicability of their SDM interventions.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pessoal de Saúde / Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pessoal de Saúde / Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article