Developing an integrated multilevel model of uncertainty in health care: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis

Abstract

IntroductionUncertainty is an inevitable part of healthcare and a source of confusion and challenge to decision-making. Several taxonomies of uncertainty have been developed, but mainly focus on decisions in clinical settings. Our goal was to develop a holistic model of uncertainty that can be applied to both clinical as well as public and global health scenarios.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and Google scholar in March 2021 for literature reviews, qualitative studies and case studies related to classifications or models of uncertainty in healthcare. Empirical articles were assessed for study limitations using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. We synthesised the literature using a thematic analysis and developed a dynamic multilevel model of uncertainty. We sought patient input to assess relatability of the model and applied it to two case examples.ResultsWe screened 4125 studies and included 15 empirical studies, 13 literature reviews and 5 case studies. We identified 77 codes and organised these into 26 descriptive and 11 analytical themes of uncertainty. The themes identified are global, public health, healthcare system, clinical, ethical, relational, personal, knowledge exchange, epistemic, aleatoric and parameter uncertainty. The themes were included in a model, which captures the macro, meso and microlevels and the inter-relatedness of uncertainty. We successfully piloted the model on one public health example and an environmental topic. The main limitations are that the research input into our model predominantly came from North America and Europe, and that we have not yet tested the model in a real-life setting.ConclusionWe developed a model that can comprehensively capture uncertainty in public and global health scenarios. It builds on models that focus solely on clinical settings by including social and political contexts and emphasising the dynamic interplay between different areas of uncertainty.

Living in the non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease silent epidemic: a qualitative systematic review of patients' perspectives

“…Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) 24 . The CASP Checklist consists of 10 items developed to assess the trustworthiness, relevance, and results of published papers and is widely used for quality assessment of qualitative studies 25–28 . For each study, an assessment of the transparency of reporting was conducted to provide contextual details for the reader to evaluate the credibility, dependability and transferability of the study findings to their own setting.…”

Barriers and facilitators to managing uncertainty in nurses’ clinical reasoning in post-anaesthesia care units: a qualitative thematic analysis

“…7,8 Another study offered archetypes applicable to various health ecosystems and proposed an overarching model of different types of uncertainty that demonstrated their interrelatedness in health systems. 9 Moreover, Kalke and colleagues underscored the necessity for a more in-depth exploration of healthcare providers' encounters with uncertainty and highlighted challenges in researching uncertainty communication, particularly emphasizing probability, scientific issues, and patient experiences.…”

Uncertainty in tuberculosis clinical decision-making: An umbrella review with systematic methods and thematic analysis

“…Provider characteristics, including their ability to cope with complexity, risk, and uncertainty, contribute to process variability [ 19 ]. Uncertainty is an inevitable component of clinical practice and can occur throughout the decision-making process: when formulating clinical hypotheses, identifying a diagnosis, choosing a test and interpreting its result, and interpreting patient preferences [ 20 ]. Multilevel models of uncertainty emphasize the dynamic interplay between different sources and types of uncertainty at each level, and may be useful to classify the challenges of clinical decision-making [ 20 ].…”