Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: Online international Delphi consensus process

British Medical Journal

Volumn 333, Issue 7565, 2006, Pages 417-419

  Elwyn, Glyn ^a   O'Connor, Annette ^b   Stacey, Dawn ^c   Volk, Robert ^d   Edwards, Adrian ^a   Coulter, Angela ^e   Thomson, Richard ^f   Barratt, Alexandra ^g   Butow, Phyllis ^h   Barry, Michael ⁱ   Mulley, Albert G ⁱ   Sepucha, Karen ⁱ   Bernstein, Steven ^j   Clarke, Aileen ^k   Entwistle, Vikki ^l   Feldman Stewart, Deb ^m   Holmes Rovner, Margaret ⁿ   Llewellyn Thomas, Hilary ^o   Moumjid, Nora ^p   Ruland, Cornelia ^q   Sykes, Alan ^r   Whelan, Tim ^s   more..

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^d BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e PICKER INSTITUTE EUROPE   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^g UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^h HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

ⁱ VA ANN ARBOR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^j Public Health Resource Unit   (United Kingdom)

^k UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^l QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^m MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁿ DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^o CENTRE LÉON BÉRARD   (France)

^p OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^q 171 Gower Road   (United Kingdom)

^r JURAVINSKI CANCER CENTRE   (Canada)

^s NONE

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; INTERNET; PATIENT COUNSELING; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW;

EID: 33748272120     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. O'Connor AM, Stacey D, Entwisitle V, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Rovner D, Holmes-Rovner M, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(1):CD001431.
2. Molenaar S, Sprangers MA, Postma-Schuit FC, Rutgers EJ, Noorlander J, Hendricks J, et al. Feasibility and effects of decision aids. Med Decis Making 2000;20:112-27.
3. Estabrooks C, Goel V, Thiel E, Pinfold P, Sawka C, Williams I. Decision aids: are they worth it? A systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 2001;6:170-82.
4. Entwistle V. The potential contribution of decision aids to screening programmes. Health Expect 2001;4:109-15.
5. Whelah T, Levine M, Willan A, Garni A, Sanders K, Mirsky D, et al. Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA 2004;292:435-41.
6. Kennedy AD, Sculpher MJ, Coulter A, Dwyer N, Rees M, Abrams KR, et al. Effects of decision aids for menorrhagia on treatment choices, health outcomes, and costs. JAMA 2002;288:2701-8.
7. Evans R, Elwyn G, Edwards A. Making interactive decision support for patients a reality. Inform Prim Care 2004;12:109-13.
8. Charles C, Garni A, Whelan T, O'Brien MA. Treatment decision aids: conceptual issues and future directions. Health Expect 2005;8:114-25.
9. Cluzeau FA, Burgers JS, Brouwers M, Grol R, Mäkelä M, Littlejohns P, et al. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:18-23.
10. Sepucha KR, Fowler FJ, Mulley AG. Policy support for patient-centered care: the need for measurable improvements in decision quality. Health Aff (Mittwood) 2004;suppl web exclusive:VAR54-62.
11. International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration. Background evidence reports from expert panels for 12 quality domains. http://ipdas.ohri.ca/ (accessed Jan 2006).
12. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G. The role of decision analysis in informed consent: choosing between intuition and systematicity. Soc Sci Med 1997;44:647-56.
13. Kahnemann D. Experienced utility and objective happiness: a moment-based approach. In: Kahnemann D, Tversky A, eds. Choices, values and frames. New York: Cambridge University Press and Russell Sage Foundation, 2000:673-92.
14. Brook RH. Appropriateness: the next frontier. BMJ 1994;308:217-8.
15. Campbell SM, Cantrill JA, Roberts D. Prescribing indicators for UK general practice: Delphi consultation study. BMJ 2000;321:425-8.