Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough?

Coulter, Angela; Entwistle, Vikki; Gilbert, David

doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7179.318

Cited by 540 publications

(482 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

447

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients who are more actively involved in the discussions on the management of their diabetes achieve better sugar control. On the other hand, patients whose doctors are ignorant about their values and preferences may receive treatment that is inappropriate to their needs [7].…”

Section: Patient Education: Definition Educational Interventions Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patients often complain about the difficulty of obtaining enough and reliable information [7]. However they may not be receptive to the information communicated to them.…”

Section: Patient Education: Definition Educational Interventions Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The biomedical approach does not sit easily with the more inclusive patient involvement and is a model that shows its age in today's information-hungry society [9]. Providing information to patients is considered a crucial issue [13], yet many patients report considerable difficulties in obtaining relevant information [7]. There are numerous reasons for this.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consultation times are limited. There is often insufficient time to explain fully the condition and the treatment choices [7]. Doctors' traditional methods may not be adequate for informing some patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Patient information and education with modern media: the Spine Society of Europe Patient Line

Pellisé¹,

Sell

2009

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of the patient as an active partner in health care, and not just a passive object of diagnostic testing and medical treatment, is widely accepted. Providing information to patients is considered a crucial issue and the central focus in patient educational activities. It is necessary to educate patients on the nature of the outcomes and the benefits and risks of the procedures to involve them in the decision-making process and enable them to achieve fully informed consent. Information materials must contain scientifically reliable information and be presented in a form that is acceptable and useful to patients. Given the mismatch between public beliefs and current evidence, strategies for changing the public perceptions are required. Traditional patient education programmes have to face the potential barriers of storage, access problems and the need to keep content materials up to date. A computer-based resource provides many advantages, including ''just-intime'' availability and a private learning environment. The use of the Internet for patient information needs will continue to expand as Internet access becomes readily available. However, the problem is no longer in finding information, but in assessing the credibility and validity of it. Health Web sites should provide health information that is secure and trustworthy. The large majority of the Web sites providing information related to spinal disorders are of limited and poor quality. Patient Line (PL), a patient information section in the Web site of Eurospine, was born in 2005 to offer patients and the general population the accumulated expertise represented by the members of the society and provide up-to-date information related to spinal disorders. In areas where evidence is scarce, Patient Line provides a real-time opinion of the EuroSpine membership. The published data reflect the pragmatic and the common sense range of treatments offered by the Eurospine membership. The first chapters have been dedicated to sciatica, scoliosis, cervical pain syndromes, low back pain and motion preservation surgery. Since 2008, the information has been available in English, German, French and Spanish. The goal is for Patient Line to become THE European patient information Web site on spinal disorders, providing reliable and updated best practice and evidence-based information where the evidence exists.

show abstract

Section: Patient Education: Definition Educational Interventions Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patients often complain about the difficulty of obtaining enough and reliable information [7]. However they may not be receptive to the information communicated to them.…”

Section: Patient Education: Definition Educational Interventions Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patient information and education with modern media: the Spine Society of Europe Patient Line

Pellisé¹,

Sell

2009

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This could influence the decision-making process. 7 The aim of this study was to examine the patient's role in the decision-making process. The main factors observed were: patients' preferred level of participation, patients' perceived level of participation, sources of information used by patients, and which sources they found most useful.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The patient's role in the decision-making process—a perspective from the Liverpool Ocular Oncology Centre

Purbrick

Tu²,

Damato³

2005

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To examine the patient's role in the decision-making process in a tertiary adult ocular oncology service. Methods A prospective study was carried out of patients attending for follow-up at the Liverpool ocular oncology centre (LOOC), a tertiary adult ocular oncology service. Participants were patients who attended the clinic between September and October 2003. Through supervised completion of questionnaires, the main factors observed were: patients' preferred level of participation, patients' perceived level of participation, sources of information used by patients, and which sources they found most useful. Results In all, 39 patients were included in the study. The majority of patients (69.2%) would have preferred to make a shared decision with the doctor (10.3% preferring an active role, 20.5% preferring a passive role), while 48.7% perceived having had a shared role (25.6% felt they had had an active role, 25.6% a passive one). Outside the LOOC, general ophthalmologists were the most frequently cited source of information from health professionals, and were also scored as the most useful. Family and friends were the most common source of informal information, followed by use of the Internet. Tape recordings of the consultations were reported as the most popular resource provided by the LOOC. Conclusions Patients attending the LOOC have a strong desire for involvement in the decision-making process. Patients receive little formal or informal information outside this tertiary centre. Further work is required to assess the effectiveness of physicians' communication skills and the influence of their recommendations on patient choice.

show abstract

Empirical Studies Assessing the Quality of Health Information for Consumers on the World Wide Web

Eysenbach

Powell²,

Kuß³

et al. 2002

JAMA

1,582

1,214

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T HE INTERNET HAS BECOME AN IMportant mass medium for consumers seeking health information and health care services online.1 A recent concern and public health issue has been the quality of health information on the World Wide Web. However, the scale of the problem and the "epidemiology" (distribution and determinants) of poor health information on the Web are still unclear, as is their impact on public health and the question of whether poor health information on the Web is a problem at all. 2 Many studies have been conducted to describe, critically appraise, and analyze consumer health information on the Web. These typically report proportions of inaccurate or imperfect information as estimates of the prevalence of flawed information or the risk of encountering misinformation on the Web.However, to date no systematic and comprehensive synthesis of the methodology and evidence has been attempted. Two previous systematic reviews focused on compiling quality criteria and rating instruments, but did not synthesize evaluation results. Jadad and Gagliari 3 reviewed nonresearch-based rating systems (eg, criAuthor Affiliations: Unit for Cybermedicine and EHealth, Department of Clinical Social Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (Dr Eysenbach); Health Services Research Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, England (Dr Powell); Department of Medical Epidemiology, Biometry and Informatics, University of Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/Saale, Germany (Dr Kuss); and Global Health Network Group, Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa (Ms Sa). Dr Eysenbach is now with the Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario. Corresponding Author and Reprints: Gunther Eysenbach, MD, Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, Toronto General Hospital, 190 Elizabeth St, Toronto, Ontario,. ContextThe quality of consumer health information on the World Wide Web is an important issue for medicine, but to date no systematic and comprehensive synthesis of the methods and evidence has been performed. ObjectivesTo establish a methodological framework on how quality on the Web is evaluated in practice, to determine the heterogeneity of the results and conclusions, and to compare the methodological rigor of these studies, to determine to what extent the conclusions depend on the methodology used, and to suggest future directions for research. . We also conducted hand searches, general Internet searches, and a personal bibliographic database search. Data Sources We searched MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE (1966 throughSeptem Study SelectionWe included published and unpublished empirical studies in any language in which investigators searched the Web systematically for specific health information, evaluated the quality of Web sites or pages, and reported quantitative results. We screened 7830 citations and retrieved 170 potentially eligible full articles. A total of 79 distinct studies met the inclusion criteria, evaluating 5941 health Web sites and 1329 Web...

show abstract

Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough?

Cited by 540 publications

References 10 publications

Patient information and education with modern media: the Spine Society of Europe Patient Line

Patient information and education with modern media: the Spine Society of Europe Patient Line

The patient's role in the decision-making process—a perspective from the Liverpool Ocular Oncology Centre

Empirical Studies Assessing the Quality of Health Information for Consumers on the World Wide Web

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About