Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36129731›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2022

Decision aids for home and community care: a systematic review.

Tania Lognon, Karine V Plourde, Emmanuelle Aubin, Anik M C Giguere, Patrick M Archambault, Dawn Stacey, France Légaré

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of patient decision aids for hypertension.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Tania LognonDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9045-2817
Karine V PlourdeVITAM-Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8628-3950
Emmanuelle AubinCanada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation, Patient-partner, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
Anik M C GiguereVITAM-Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9928-7395
Patrick M ArchambaultVITAM-Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5090-6439
Dawn StaceySchool of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2681-741X
France LégaréVITAM-Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec, Quebec, Canada france.legare@mfa.ulaval.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-2296-6696

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDecision aids (DAs) for clients in home and community care can support shared decision-making (SDM) with patients, healthcare teams and informal caregivers. We aimed to identify DAs developed for home and community care, verify their adherence to international DA criteria and explore the involvement of interprofessional teams in their development and use.

designSystematic review reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Six electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library) from inception to November 2019, social media and grey literature websites up to January 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: DAs designed for home and community care settings or including home care or community services as options. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently reviewed citations. Analysis consisted of a narrative synthesis of outcomes and a thematic analysis. DAs were appraised using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). We collected information on the involvement of interprofessional teams, including nurses, in their development and use.

resultsAfter reviewing 10 337 database citations and 924 grey literature citations, we extracted characteristics of 33 included DAs. DAs addressed a variety of decision points. Nearly half (42%) were relevant to older adults. Several DAs did not meet IPDAS criteria. Involvement of nurses and interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs was minimal (33.3% of DAs).

conclusionDAs concerned a variety of decisions, especially those related to older people. This reflects the complexity of decisions and need for better support in this sector. There is little evidence about the involvement of interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs in home and community care settings. An interprofessional approach to designing DAs for home care could facilitate SDM with people being cared for by teams. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020169450.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesPatient ParticipationAgedDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesHumansPatient Care TeamMEDICAL EDUCATION & TRAININGPRIMARY CAREPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID36129731
PMCPMC9362828

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.