Table 1 Basic characteristics of the synthesized papers (n = 27)
First author, year | Country | Study design | Guiding theory | Setting | Providers (N) | Consumers (N) | Decision type | Intervention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Berger-Höger, 2015 [12] | Germany | Study protocol for a cluster RCT | Six-step Shared Decision Making Model | Certified breast care centers | Specialized breast care and oncology nurses (n/r) | Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (N=192 planned) | Treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ | Patient decision aid, at least one decision coaching session and a final shared decision making physician encounter |
Berger-Höger, 2017 [13] | Germany | Intervention development & mixed method pilot | Same with above | Two breast care centres | Specialized breast care and oncology nurses (N=4) | Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (N=7) | Same with above | Same with above |
Berger-Hoger, 2019 [11] | Germany | Cluster RCT | Same with above | 16 certified breast care centers | Specialized breast care and oncology nurses (N=31) | Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (IG (N=37) versus CG (N=30)) | Same with above | Same with above |
Brown, 2016 [33] | Australia | Study protocol for an RCT | ODSF | Four public health renal departments in Queensland | Trained renal nurse (n/r) | Older patients with advanced kidney disease (N=122 planned) | Dialysis or conservative kidney management | A workbook, audio recording, personal worksheet and consultation with a trained renal nurse |
Brown, 2019 [34] | Australia | Pragmatic RCT | ODSF | Four public health renal departments in Queensland | Registered Nurse (N=1) | Older patients with advanced kidney disease (IG (N=19) versus CG (N=22)) | Same with above | Same with above |
Causarano, 2015 [35] | Canada | Pilot RCT | ODSF | A tertiary cancer center in Toronto, Canada | A plastic surgeon, a nurse specialist, a social worker, and two peer support patients (n/r) | Patients undergone mastectomy (IG (N=21) versus CG (N=20)) | Postmastectomy breast reconstruction | Pre-consultation educational group intervention (treatment options; pre- and postoperative care; values clarification; peer experience sharing) |
Davison, 1997 [36] | Canada | RCT | The Empowerment Model by Conger and Kanungo | Community urology clinic | Physicians (n/r) | Men with prostate cancer (N=60) | Prostate cancer treatment | A written information package and medical consultation |
Feenstra, 2015 [37] | Canada | Pre-/post-test | ODSF, OFDG | An ambulatory diabetes clinic in a tertiary children’s hospital | Diabetes social workers (N=2) | Families with the children suffer from type 1 diabetes (N=7) | Insulin delivery options | Decision coaching |
Hacking, 2013 [38] | Scotland | RCT | SCOPED | One hospital diagnostic clinic | Research assistants (N=2) | Early-stage prostate cancer patients (IG (N=63) versus CG (N=60)) | Treatment decisions for early-stage prostate cancer | Decision navigation |
Holt, 2009 [39] | USA | Cluster RCT | Social Cognitive Theory, Health Belief Model | Two area Baptist churches | One trained community health advisor from each church (n/r) | African American men who had not had prostate cancer (IG (N=31) versus CG (N=18)) | Prostate cancer screening | An educational session and distributed educational print materials |
Ilic, 2018 [40] | Australia | Qualitative study | n/r | n/r | Practice nurses (N=12) & general practitioners (N=16) | Men with prostate cancer (N=19) | Prostate cancer screening | n/r |
Johnson, 2010 [41] | Nicaragua, Mexico & Indonesia | Pre/post study | Client-centered counseling principles | 49 government health facilities in Nicaragua; 9 government health facilities in Mexico City; 6 public health clinics in Indonesia | In Nicaragua: Healthcare providers (N=59); In Mexico: doctors (N=9), nurses (N=2), social workers (N=2); In Indonesia: midwives (N=12) | Family Planning Clients (n/r) | Family Planning method | A 2- to 4-day training workshop for providers to introduce the Tool and then use of the Tool in routine work for a time (4 months in Nicaragua, 1 month in Mexico and Indonesia) |
Jull, 2015 [42] | Canada | Qualitative study | ODSF | Minwaashin Lodge | n/r | Indigenous women (N=19) | Neutral decision with health impact | n/r |
Kearing, 2016 [43] | USA | RCT | ODSF | Orthopaedic spine clinic | Nurse, genetic counselor, social workers (n/r) | Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (IG (N=98) versus CG (N=101)) | Treatment of spinal stenosis | Video decision aid plus health coaching |
Lawson, 2020 [44] | Canada | Pre/post study | ODSF, OFDG | Pediatric diabetes clinic in a tertiary care centre | Social workers (N=2) | Youth (N=45) and parents (N=66) | Insulin delivery options | Decision coaching |
Lenzen, 2018 [45] | Netherlands | Process evaluation | A framework for shared decision making about goals and actions, a 4-circles tool | Regional family medicine organization | Practice nurses (N=15) | Patients (N=10) | n/r | n/r |
Lepore, 2012 [46] | USA | RCT | ODSF | A large healthcare workers’ union | Graduate students with training in public health and health education (n/r) | Immigrant Black Men (IG (N=244) versus CG (N=246)) | Prostate cancer screening | Educational pamphlet and a maximum of two tailored telephone education |
Lowenstein, 2020Â [47] | USA | Pre/post study | ODSF | 3 radiology clinics | Advanced practice providers (N=4), research nurse (N=1), and radiologist (N=1) | Patients (N=81) | Lung cancer screening | Patient decision aid and decision coaching |
McBride, 2016 [48] | UK | RCT | SCOPED | 1 diabetes foot clinic | Health psychologists (N=5) | Patients with a diabetic foot ulcer (IG (N=30) versus CG (N=26)) | Treatment of diabetic foot ulcer | Decision Navigation |
Mishel, 2009 [49] | USA | RCT | Uncertainty of Illness Theory | Prostate cancer treatment centres | Nurse (N=1) | Men (IG (N=93) versus CG (N=74)) | Prostate cancer treatment | A booklet, a DVD demonstrating communication skills, 4 coaching calls |
Rahn, 2015 [51] | Germany | Study protocol for a cluster RCT | Six-step Shared Decision Making model | Neurological outpatient clinics throughout Germany | Nurses specialising in multiple sclerosis (n/r) | Patients older than 18 years with possible multiple sclerosis (N=300 planned) | Immunotherapy decision | Decision coaching |
Rahn, 2018 [50] | Germany | Feasibility testing, pilot RCT, & mixed methods process evaluation | Same with above | Two pilot multiple sclerosis centres in Germany | Nurses specialising in multiple sclerosis (N=4) | People with possible multiple sclerosis (IG (N=38) versus CG (N=35)) | Immunotherapy decision | Decision coaching |
Rothert, 1997 [52] | USA | RCT | A conceptual framework for decision support | A midwestern university community | Physician (N=1), nurses (N=3) psychologists (N=2) and health services researcher (N=1) | Women ((IG (N=83) versus CG1 (N=87)) versus CG2 (N=78)) | Management of menopausal symptoms and hormone replacement therapy | Brochure, structured lecture and discussion, and tailored decision support intervention |
Shepherd, 2019 [53] | Scotland | RCT | SCOPED | One clinic in a cancer centre | Research psychologists (N=2) | Colorectal cancer patients (IG (N=68) versus CG (N=69)) | Treatment of colorectal cancer | Consultation planning, summary and audio recording |
Sheridan, 2012 [54] | USA | RCT | n/r | 4 primary care practices | Health counselor (N=1) | Men (IG (N=60) versus CG (N=70)) | Prostrate cancer screening | video-based decision aid and researcher-led coaching session |
Simmons, 2017 [55] | Australia | Non- randomized comparative study | ODSF and IPDAS criteria | Youth mental health service in New South Wales Australia | Peer support workers (n/r) | Young people (IG (N=149) versus CG (N=80)) | Mental health | Decision support using an online tool |
Thom, 2016 [56] | USA | Qualitative study | n/r | 6 urban public health primary care clinics | Medical assistants or other allied nonlicensed health workers (N=17) | Low-income patients with chronic conditions (N=30 for focus group, N=42 for individual interview) | n/r | n/r |