Journal of general internal medicine · 2025
Shared Decision-Making. A Primer for Clinicians.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Elwyn Glyn, Gulbrandsen Pål, Leavitt Hannah, Abukmail Eman, Clayman Marla L, Edwards Adrian, Finderup Jeanette, Fisher Alana, Grande Stuart W, Hahlweg Pola, Hoffmann Tammy, Hou Wen-Hsuan, Hernández-Leal María José, Leung Debra, Lu Weiwei, Mandelkow Lars, Pecanac Kristen E, Pieterse Arwen H, Price Amy, Rabben Jannicke, Riganti Paula, Sanatani Michael, Scheibler Fülöp, Schoefs Elise, Taylor Owen A, Valentine Kathrene D, Wexler Richard
Аннотация
IMPORTANCE: Shared decision-making is a widely promoted approach, yet clinicians, typically supportive in principle, find it difficult to implement because of concerns and barriers they commonly encounter in practice.
OBJECTIVE: To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians.
METHODS: We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus.
FINDINGS: Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients' resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.
OBJECTIVE: To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians.
METHODS: We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus.
FINDINGS: Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients' resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.