ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Patient Participation in Decision-Making During Nursing Care: A Relational Autonomy Perspective.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of concept mapping-based self-care education on quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a non-randomized quasi-experimental study.BMC research notes · 2026Trial
- Beyond one-size-fits-all: mapping information-seeking and decision-making pathways in cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Patient Participation in Decision-Making During Nursing Care: A Relational Autonomy Perspective.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Article
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
aimTo explore patient participation in decision-making during nursing care experienced by patients with chronic diseases, family members and nurses.
designFocused ethnography.
methodsThis study included an 8-month fieldwork in a Chinese hospital. Fieldnotes from 90 h of participant observation and 30 semi-structured interviews (10 nurses, 13 patients, three family members, and four with both patients and family members present) were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsPatient participation in decision-making was facilitated in the form of co-determination, which respected patients' relational autonomy. However, participation required further development or was challenged in the form of unilateral determination, constraining relational autonomy. Interpersonal relationships among nurses, patients and family members played a significant role in promoting patient participation in decision-making.
conclusionA relational autonomy framework was identified to understand patient participation in decision-making within nursing care. While patient participation is encouraged and autonomy is respected in some situations, paternalistic approaches still persist in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Enhancing nurses' awareness of involving patients and family members in decision-making is needed. The findings highlight the need for better integration and implementation of existing guidelines to support healthcare staff, patients and family members. They also point to the importance of developing culturally relevant frameworks to promote patient participation in decision-making in nursing care. IMPACT: This research provided insight into the experiences of chronically ill patients, family members and nurses regarding patient participation in decision-making during inpatient nursing care within a non-Western context. Interpersonal dynamics are highlighted as a key element influencing patient participation. REPORTING
methodsThe study is reported using the COREQ checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.