ReviewClinical kidney journal2023
Shared decision making: a personal view from two kidney doctors and a patient.
Review in Clinical kidney journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transformative global models for CKD care: case studies and strategies.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- The dynamics of deceased donor kidney transplant decision making: insights from studying individual clinicians' offer decisions.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025Article
- Shared Decision-Making in Choosing Dialysis Modalities for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: An Evolutionary Concept Analysis.Nursing & health sciences · 2025Review
- Mind the gap in kidney care: Translating what we know into what we do.Nephrology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Article
- Mind the gap in kidney care: translating what we know into what we do.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2025Article
- Investigating the pathways of medication adherence in renal transplant recipients based on the COM-B model: the parallel mediating effects of beliefs and emotion regulation efficacy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Communicating treatment options to older patients with advanced kidney disease: a conversation analysis study.BMC nephrology · 2024Observational
- Mind the gap in kidney care: translating what we know into what we do.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2024Review
- Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know Into What We Do.American journal of hypertension · 2024Article
- Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know into What We Do.Kidney international reports · 2024Article
- Mind the gap in kidney care: Translating what we know into what we do.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Amplifying the voices of patients with kidney disease.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2024Article
- Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know Into What We do.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2024Article
- Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know into What We Do.Blood purification · 2024Article
- Mind the gap in kidney care: translating what we know into what we do.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologia · 2024Article
- Involving patients in treatment decisions, disease management and research for end-stage kidney disease.Clinical kidney journal · 2023Article
- Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know into What We Do.Indian journal of nephrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shared decision making (SDM) combines the clinician's expertise in the treatment of disease with the patient's expertise in their lived experience and what is important to them. All decisions made in the care of patients with kidney disease can potentially be explored through SDM. Adoption of SDM in routine kidney care faces numerous institutional and practical barriers. Patients with chronic disease who have become accustomed to paternalistic care may need support to engage in SDM-even though most patients actively want more involvement in decisions about their care. Nephrologists often underestimate the risks and overestimate the benefits of investigations and treatments and often default to recommending burdensome treatments rather than discussing prognosis openly. Guideline bodies continue to issue recommendations written for healthcare professionals without providing patient decision aids. To mitigate health inequalities, care needs to be taken to provide SDM to all patients, not just the highly health-literate patients least likely to need additional support in decision making. Kidney doctors spend much of their time in the consulting room, and it is unjustifiable that so little attention is paid to the teaching, audit and maintenance of consultation skills. Writing letters to the patient to summarise the consultation rather than sending them a copy of a letter between health professionals sets the tone for a consultation in which the patient is an active partner. Adoption of SDM will require nephrologists to relinquish long-established paternalistic models of care and restructure care around the values and preferences of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.