OBJECTIVE: To characterize the use of personal stories in publicly available patient decision aids (PtDAs). METHODS: Descriptive study guided by a structured coding taxonomy based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, Ottawa Decision Support Framework, Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative content analysis. Personal story was defined as an illustrative, first-person narrative in any format. Sampling from the 2007 Cochrane A to Z Inventory was stratified by developer and one-third of PtDAs were randomly sampled. RESULTS: Of 200 publicly available PtDAs from 5 developers, 168 from 3 developers contained stories. A stratified sample of 56 PtDAs contained 260 stories. Thirty of 56 PtDAs presented an equal number of stories favouring or against the most intensive option. Thirty PtDAs described narrators' satisfaction with outcome(s): 21 contained only stories portraying satisfaction; 9 contained stories portraying satisfaction and dissatisfaction. CONCLUSION: Publicly available PtDAs vary in their use of stories. Most PtDAs balance the number of stories favouring and against the most intensive option presented; most PtDAs do not balance the number of stories portraying satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the outcome(s) of the decision. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Research is needed to better understand the impact of stories on patient decision making and to inform the guidelines for their inclusion in PtDAs.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the use of personal stories in publicly available patient decision aids (PtDAs). METHODS: Descriptive study guided by a structured coding taxonomy based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, Ottawa Decision Support Framework, Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative content analysis. Personal story was defined as an illustrative, first-person narrative in any format. Sampling from the 2007 Cochrane A to Z Inventory was stratified by developer and one-third of PtDAs were randomly sampled. RESULTS: Of 200 publicly available PtDAs from 5 developers, 168 from 3 developers contained stories. A stratified sample of 56 PtDAs contained 260 stories. Thirty of 56 PtDAs presented an equal number of stories favouring or against the most intensive option. Thirty PtDAs described narrators' satisfaction with outcome(s): 21 contained only stories portraying satisfaction; 9 contained stories portraying satisfaction and dissatisfaction. CONCLUSION: Publicly available PtDAs vary in their use of stories. Most PtDAs balance the number of stories favouring and against the most intensive option presented; most PtDAs do not balance the number of stories portraying satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the outcome(s) of the decision. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Research is needed to better understand the impact of stories on patient decision making and to inform the guidelines for their inclusion in PtDAs.
Authors: Amanda J Dillard; Angela Fagerlin; Sonya Dal Cin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Peter A Ubel Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2010-03-21 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Jürgen M Giesler; Bettina Keller; Tim Repke; Rainer Leonhart; Joachim Weis; Rebecca Muckelbauer; Nina Rieckmann; Jacqueline Müller-Nordhorn; Gabriele Lucius-Hoene; Christine Holmberg Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-10-13 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Angelo E Volandes; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Michael J Barry; Muriel R Gillick; Kenneth L Minaker; Yuchiao Chang; E Francis Cook; Elmer D Abbo; Areej El-Jawahri; Susan L Mitchell Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-05-28
Authors: Hilary L Bekker; Anna E Winterbottom; Phyllis Butow; Amanda J Dillard; Deb Feldman-Stewart; Floyd J Fowler; Maria L Jibaja-Weiss; Victoria A Shaffer; Robert J Volk Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: John F P Bridges; Thomas Lynch; Anne L R Schuster; Norah L Crossnohere; Katherine Clegg Smith; Rebecca A Aslakson Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 3.234