A computerised guidance tree (decision aid) for hypertension, based on decision analysis: Development and preliminary evaluation

European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 146-149

  Thomson, Patricia ^a   Dowding, Dawn ^b   Swanson, Vivien ^a   Bland, Richard ^a   Mair, Chris ^a   Morrison, Audrey ^a   Taylor, Anne ^a   Beechey, Claire ^a   Niven, Catherine A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Decision aids; Decision analysis; Hypertension

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; LIFESTYLE; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT PLANNING;

AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER LITERACY; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; DECISION TREES; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; LIFE STYLE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NURSING ASSESSMENT; NURSING EVALUATION RESEARCH; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PILOT PROJECTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCOTLAND; THERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 33646168362     PISSN: 14745151     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2005.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Ramsay L.E., Williams B., Johnston G., et al. Guidelines for the management of hypertension: report of the third working party of the British Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens 13 (1999) 569-592
2. Hamilton G.A. Measuring adherence in a hypertension clinical trial. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2 (2003) 219-228
3. Pell I., Dowie J., Clarke A., Kennedy A., and Bhavnani V. Development and preliminary evaluation of a clinical guidance programme for the decision about prophylactic oophrectomy in women undergoing a hysterectomy. Qual Saf Health Care 11 (2002) 32-39
4. Thomson R., Bowling A., and Moss F. Engaging patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery and public health. Qual Health Care 10 Suppl. 1 (2001) i1
5. Doyal L. Informed consent: moral necessity or illusion?. Qual Health Care 109 Suppl. 1 (2002) i 29-i 33
6. Estabrooks C., Goel V., Thiel E., Pinford P., Sawka C., and Williams I. Decision aids: are they worth it? A systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 6 (2001) 170-182
7. O'Connor A., Stacey D., Rovner, et al. Decisions aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions (Cochrane Review) (2002), The Cochrane Library, Oxford Update Software
8. Montgomery A.A., Harding J., and Fahey T. Shared decision making in hypertension: the impact of patient preferences on treatment choice. Fam Pract 18 (2001) 309-313
9. Thomson R., Robinson A., Greenaway J., and Lowe P. Development and description of a decision analysis based support tool for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Qual Saf Health Care 11 (2002) 25-31
10. Elwyn G., Edwards A., Eccles M., and Rovner D. Decision analysis in patient care. Lancet 358 (2001) 571-574
11. Montgomer A.A., Fahey T., and Peters T.J. A factorial randomized controlled trial of decision analysis and an information video plus leaflet for newly diagnosed hypertensive patients. Br J Gen Pract 53 (2003) 446-453
12. Anderson K.M., Odell P.M., Wilson P.W.F., and Kannel W.B. Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. Am Heart J 121 (1990) 293-298
13. McKinstry B. Do patients wish to be involved in decision making in the consultation? A cross sectional survey with video vignettes. BMJ 321 (2000) 867-871
14. Edwards A., and Bastian H. Risk communication-making evidence part of patient choices. In: Edwards A., and Elwyn G. (Eds). Evidence-based patient choice: inevitable or impossible? (2001), Oxford University Press, Oxford 144-160