Literature DB >> 17203362

Shared decision-making, gender and new technologies.

Kristin Zeiler1.   

Abstract

Much discussion of decision-making processes in medicine has been patient-centred. It has been assumed that there is, most often, one patient. Less attention has been given to shared decision-making processes where two or more patients are involved. This article aims to contribute to this special area. What conditions need to be met if decision-making can be said to be shared? What is a shared decision-making process and what is a shared autonomous decision-making process? Why make the distinction? Examples are drawn from the area of new reproductive medicine and clinical genetics. Possible gender-differences in shared decision-making are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17203362     DOI: 10.1007/s11019-006-9034-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Health Care Philos        ISSN: 1386-7423


  7 in total

1.  Understanding autonomy relationally: toward a reconfiguration of bioethical principles.

Authors:  A Donchin
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  2001-08

2.  Beware! Preimplantation genetic diagnosis may solve some old problems but it also raises new ones.

Authors:  H Draper; R Chadwick
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Translating person-centred care: a case study of preceptor nurses and their teaching practices in acute care areas.

Authors:  Bridie McCarthy
Journal:  J Clin Nurs       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.036

4.  The decision making process regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potential life-saving treatments in a children's hospital.

Authors:  K Street; R Ashcroft; J Henderson; A V Campbell
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  Patient involvement in clinical decision making: the effect of GP attitude on patient satisfaction.

Authors:  Benedicte Carlsen; Arild Aakvik
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Observing decision-making in the general practice consultation: who makes which decisions?

Authors:  Sarah Ford; Theo Schofield; Tony Hope
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Public deliberation and private choice in genetics and reproduction.

Authors:  M Parker
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.903

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  Experiences of Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) in Sweden: a Three-Year Follow-Up of Men and Women.

Authors:  Stina Järvholm; Ann Thurin-Kjellberg; Malin Broberg
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-02-12       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Preferred problem solving and decision-making role in fertility treatment among women following an unsuccessful in vitro fertilization cycle.

Authors:  Celia Hoi Yan Chan; Bobo Hi Po Lau; Michelle Yi Jun Tam; Ernest Hung Yu Ng
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 2.809

3.  Qualitative study of GPs' views and experiences of population-based preconception expanded carrier screening in the Netherlands: bioethical perspectives.

Authors:  Sofia Morberg Jämterud; Anke Snoek; I M van Langen; Marian Verkerk; Kristin Zeiler
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Patients' and physicians' gender and perspective on shared decision-making: A cross-sectional study from Dubai.

Authors:  Mohamad Alameddine; Farah Otaki; Karen Bou-Karroum; Leon Du Preez; Pietie Loubser; Reem AlGurg; Alawi Alsheikh-Ali
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 3.752

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.