SynthesisNeurocritical care2025
Shared Decision-Making for Patients with Stroke in Neurocritical Care: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis.
Synthesis in Neurocritical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cultural and Structural Influences on Shared Decision-Making in the Care of Critically Ill Patients with Stroke in China: A Critical Realist Qualitative Study.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of early intracranial pressure curve following surgical decompression: A machine learning analysis.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Review
- Narrative Review on Post-Stroke Outcomes Through Recognition of Frailty, Sarcopenia, and Palliative Care Needs.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Patient preference predictors revisited: technically feasible, ethically desirable, yet must be clinically relevant.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Decision-making for patients with stroke in neurocritical care is uniquely challenging because of the gravity and high preference sensitivity of these decisions. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended to align decisions with patient values. However, limited evidence exists on the experiences and perceptions of key stakeholders involved in SDM for neurocritical patients with stroke. This review aims to address this gap by providing a comprehensive analysis of the experiences and perspectives of those involved in SDM for neurocritical stroke care to inform best practices in this context. A qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted following the methodological guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI), using the thematic synthesis approach outlined by Thomas and Harden. Database searches covered PubMed, CIHAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to July 2023, supplemented by manual searches. After screening, quality appraisal was performed using the JBI Appraisal Checklist. Data analysis comprised line-by-line coding, development of descriptive themes, and creation of analytical themes using NVivo 12 software. The initial search yielded 7,492 articles, with 94 undergoing full-text screening. Eighteen articles from five countries, published between 2010 and 2023, were included in the meta-synthesis. These studies focused on the SDM process, covering life-sustaining treatments (LSTs), palliative care, and end-of-life care, with LST decisions being most common. Four analytical themes, encompassing ten descriptive themes, emerged: prognostic uncertainty, multifaceted balancing act, tripartite role dynamics and information exchange, and influences of sociocultural context. These themes form the basis for a conceptual model offering deeper insights into the essential elements, relationships, and behaviors that characterize SDM in neurocritical care. This meta-synthesis of 18 primary studies offers a higher-order interpretation and an emerging conceptual understanding of SDM in neurocritical care, with implications for practice and further research. The complex role dynamics among SDM stakeholders require careful consideration, highlighting the need for stroke-specific communication strategies. Expanding the evidence base across diverse sociocultural settings is critical to enhance the understanding of SDM in neurocritical patients with stroke.Trial registration This study is registered with PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42023461608.
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.