This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (12 APR 2017)

Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

  1. Dawn Stacey1,*,
  2. France Légaré2,
  3. Nananda F Col3,
  4. Carol L Bennett4,
  5. Michael J Barry5,
  6. Karen B Eden6,
  7. Margaret Holmes-Rovner7,
  8. Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas8,
  9. Anne Lyddiatt9,
  10. Richard Thomson10,
  11. Lyndal Trevena11,
  12. Julie HC Wu4

Editorial Group: Cochrane Consumers and Communication Group

Published Online: 28 JAN 2014

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4


How to Cite

Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R, Trevena L, Wu JHC. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD001431. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4.

Author Information

  1. 1

    University of Ottawa, School of Nursing, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

  2. 2

    Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec (CRCHUQ) - Hôpital St-François d'Assise, Québec, QC, Canada

  3. 3

    University of New England, Center of Excellence in Neuroscience and Department of Medicine, Biddeford, ME, USA

  4. 4

    Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

  5. 5

    Informed Medical Decisions Foundation, Boston, MA, USA

  6. 6

    Oregon Health Sciences University, Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Portland, Oregon, USA

  7. 7

    Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, East Lansing, Michigan, USA

  8. 8

    Dartmouth College, The Dartmouth Center for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA

  9. 9

    Ingersoll, ON, Canada

  10. 10

    Newcastle University, Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

  11. 11

    The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

*Dawn Stacey, School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. dstacey@uottawa.ca.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 28 JAN 2014

SEARCH

This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (12 APR 2017)

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Study flow diagram.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Risk of bias summary as percentages across all included studies.
[Figure 3]
Figure 3. Risk of bias summary for each included study.
[Figure 4]
Figure 4. Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Knowledge, outcome: 1.1 Knowledge: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Figure 5]
Figure 5. Funnel plot of comparison: 2 Accurate risk perceptions: Decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, outcome: 2.1 Accurate risk perceptions - all studies.
[Figure 6]
Figure 6. Funnel plot of comparison: 3 Values congruent with chosen option, outcome: 3.1 Values congruent with chosen option - all studies.
[Figure 7]
Figure 7. Funnel plot of comparison: 4.1 Decisional conflict: DA vs usual care - all studies, outcome: 4.1.2 Uninformed sub-scale
[Figure 8]
Figure 8. Funnel plot of comparison: 4.1 Decisional conflict: DA vs usual care - all studies, outcome: 4.1.3 Unclear sub-scale
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 1 Knowledge: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 2 Knowledge: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 3 Knowledge: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 1.4]
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 4 Knowledge: Detailed vs simple decision aids - all studies.
[Analysis 1.5]
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 5 Knowledge: Detailed vs simple decision aids - treatment only.
[Analysis 1.6]
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 Knowledge, Outcome 6 Knowledge: Detailed vs simple decision aids - screening only.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Accurate risk perceptions: decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, Outcome 1 Accurate risk perceptions - all studies.
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Accurate risk perceptions: decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, Outcome 2 Accurate risk perceptions - treatments only.
[Analysis 2.3]
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Accurate risk perceptions: decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, Outcome 3 Accurate risk perceptions - screening only.
[Analysis 2.4]
Analysis 2.4. Comparison 2 Accurate risk perceptions: decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, Outcome 4 Accurate risk perceptions - numbers.
[Analysis 2.5]
Analysis 2.5. Comparison 2 Accurate risk perceptions: decision aid with outcome probabilities vs no outcome probability information, Outcome 5 Accurate risk perceptions - words.
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 Values congruent with chosen option, Outcome 1 Values congruent with chosen option - all studies.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 Values congruent with chosen option, Outcome 2 Values congruent with chosen option - treatment only.
[Analysis 3.3]
Analysis 3.3. Comparison 3 Values congruent with chosen option, Outcome 3 Values congruent with chosen option - screening only.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 1 Decisional conflict: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 2 Decisional conflict: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 4.3]
Analysis 4.3. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 3 Decisional conflict: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 4.4]
Analysis 4.4. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 4 Decisional conflict: Detailed vs simple decision aid - all studies.
[Analysis 4.5]
Analysis 4.5. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 5 Decisional conflict: Detailed vs simple decision aid - treatment only.
[Analysis 4.6]
Analysis 4.6. Comparison 4 Decisional conflict, Outcome 6 Decisional conflict: Detailed vs simple decision aid - screening only.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 Participation in decision making, Outcome 1 Participation in decision making: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 5.2]
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 Participation in decision making, Outcome 2 Participation in decision making: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 5.3]
Analysis 5.3. Comparison 5 Participation in decision making, Outcome 3 Participation in decision making: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 5.4]
Analysis 5.4. Comparison 5 Participation in decision making, Outcome 4 Participation in decision making: Detailed vs simple decision aid - all studies.
[Analysis 5.5]
Analysis 5.5. Comparison 5 Participation in decision making, Outcome 5 Participation in decision making: Detailed vs simple decision aid - treatment only.
[Analysis 6.1]
Analysis 6.1. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 1 Proportion undecided: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 6.2]
Analysis 6.2. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 2 Proportion undecided: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 6.3]
Analysis 6.3. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 3 Proportion undecided: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 6.4]
Analysis 6.4. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 4 Proportion undecided: Detailed vs simple decision aids - all studies.
[Analysis 6.5]
Analysis 6.5. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 5 Proportion undecided: Detailed vs simple decision aids - treatment only.
[Analysis 6.6]
Analysis 6.6. Comparison 6 Proportion undecided, Outcome 6 Proportion undecided: Detailed vs simple decision aids - screening only.
[Analysis 7.1]
Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 1 Satisfaction with the choice: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 7.2]
Analysis 7.2. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 2 Satisfaction with the choice: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 7.3]
Analysis 7.3. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 3 Satisfaction with the choice: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 7.4]
Analysis 7.4. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 4 Satisfaction with the choice: Detailed vs simple DA - all studies.
[Analysis 7.5]
Analysis 7.5. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 5 Satisfaction with the choice: Detailed vs simple DA - treatment only.
[Analysis 7.6]
Analysis 7.6. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 6 Satisfaction with the decision making process: DA vs usual care - all studies.
[Analysis 7.7]
Analysis 7.7. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 7 Satisfaction with the decision making process: DA vs usual care - treatment only.
[Analysis 7.8]
Analysis 7.8. Comparison 7 Satisfaction, Outcome 8 Satisfaction with the decision making process: DA vs usual care - screening only.
[Analysis 8.1]
Analysis 8.1. Comparison 8 Choice, Outcome 1 Choice: Surgery over conservative option: DA vs usual care.
[Analysis 8.2]
Analysis 8.2. Comparison 8 Choice, Outcome 2 Choice: Surgery over conservative option: Detailed vs simple decision aid.
[Analysis 8.3]
Analysis 8.3. Comparison 8 Choice, Outcome 3 Choice for screening.
[Analysis 8.4]
Analysis 8.4. Comparison 8 Choice, Outcome 4 Choice: Diabetes medication (uptake new medication): DA vs usual care.
[Analysis 8.5]
Analysis 8.5. Comparison 8 Choice, Outcome 5 Choice: Menopausal hormone therapy: Detailed vs simple decision aid.