Practical issues in assisting shared decision‐making

To facilitate treatment decision‐making, one aims to provide information, present it in a way that makes it as easy as possible to understand, and to help the decision‐maker through the cognitive processes that result in a treatment decision. Decision aids aim to accomplish just these goals and this paper identifies practical issues that we have encountered in creating a decision aid for men with early stage prostate cancer. We highlight the results of studies we carried out to provide an empirical basis for the decision aid that we were developing. Several of the studies were designed to identify what information key players (health professionals, patients and family members) thought was important for the decision‐making process. Another investigation studied methodological considerations in identifying important information. The final study focused on presentation issues. These studies, designed to explore what information was considered important, found great variability among both health care professionals involved in treating patients with prostate cancer (urologists, radiation oncologists, nurses in cancer clinics, and radiation technologists) and among the patients, themselves. The studies also showed that not all information contained within a typical category is of equal importance. A methodological study showed that the information that patients deem to be important to their decision depends on whether they are rating the information that could be provided, or questions that could be answered. Finally, presentation studies showed that the various formats used in presenting quantitative information are processed with differing degrees of accuracy and ease. Each of the above results has implications for those creating decision aids; these implications are highlighted.

[1]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Developing Information Materials to Present the Findings of Technology Assessments to Consumers: The Experience of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination , 1998, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[2]  T R Morgan,et al.  Information and decision-making preferences of men with prostate cancer. , 1995, Oncology nursing forum.

[3]  Nancy Lockitch Loman,et al.  SIGNALING TECHNIQUES THAT INCREASE THE UNDERSTANDABILITY OF EXPOSITORY PROSE , 1983 .

[4]  A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team. , 1993 .

[5]  A Coulter,et al.  Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough? , 1999, BMJ.

[6]  P. Walsh,et al.  A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. , 1993, The Journal of urology.

[7]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Can you repeat that? Qualitative effects of repetition and advance organizers on learning from science prose. , 1983 .

[8]  Degner Lf,et al.  Information and decision-making preferences of men with prostate cancer. , 1995 .

[9]  D. Sackett,et al.  Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. , 1989, Chest.

[10]  J. Shanteau,et al.  Environmental Stressor Effects on Creativity and Decision Making , 1993 .

[11]  Nancy L. Kocovski,et al.  Perception of Quantitative Information for Treatment Decisions , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[12]  G F Tyers,et al.  Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations. , 1995, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[13]  P. Cleaton-jones,et al.  An ethical dilemma: availability of antiretroviral therapy after clinical trials with hiv infected patients are ended , 1997, BMJ.

[14]  M. Brundage,et al.  What the prostate cancer patient should know: variations in urologists' opinions. , 1997, The Canadian journal of urology.

[15]  M. Brundage,et al.  What prostate cancer patients should know: variation in professionals' opinions. , 1998, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[16]  Tyers Gf Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations. , 1995 .

[17]  D. Sackett Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations for the management of patients. , 1993, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[18]  Deb Feldman-Stewart,et al.  What Questions Do Patients with Curable Prostate Cancer Want Answered? , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  I D Graham,et al.  Decision aids for patients considering options affecting cancer outcomes: evidence of efficacy and policy implications. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.