Literature DB >> 32428426

What Helps People Make Values-Congruent Medical Decisions? Eleven Strategies Tested across 6 Studies.

Holly O Witteman1, Anne-Sophie Julien2, Ruth Ndjaboue1, Nicole L Exe3, Valerie C Kahn3, Angela Angie Fagerlin4, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher5.   

Abstract

Background. High-quality health decisions are often defined as those that are both evidence informed and values congruent. A values-congruent decision aligns with what matters to those most affected by the decision. Values clarification methods are intended to support values-congruent decisions, but their effects on values congruence are rarely evaluated. Methods. We tested 11 strategies, including the 3 most commonly used values clarification methods, across 6 between-subjects online randomized experiments in demographically diverse US populations (n1 = 1346, n2 = 456, n3 = 840, n4 = 1178, n5 = 841, n6 = 2033) in the same hypothetical decision. Our primary outcome was values congruence. Decisional conflict was a secondary outcome in studies 3 to 6. Results. Two commonly used values clarification methods (pros and cons, rating scales) reduced decisional conflict but did not encourage values-congruent decisions. Strategies using mathematical models to show participants which option aligned with what mattered to them encouraged values-congruent decisions and reduced decisional conflict when assessed. Limitations. A hypothetical decision was necessary for ethical reasons, as we believed some strategies may harm decision quality. Later studies used more outcomes and covariates. Results may not generalize outside US-based adults with online access. We assumed validity and stability of values during the brief experiments. Conclusions. Failing to explicitly support the process of aligning options with values leads to increased proportions of values-incongruent decisions. Methods representing more than half of values clarification methods commonly in use failed to encourage values-congruent decisions. Methods that use models to explicitly show people how options align with their values offer more promise for helping people make decisions aligned with what matters to them. Decisional conflict, while arguably an important outcome in and of itself, is not an appropriate proxy for values congruence.

Entities:  

Keywords:  interactive interfaces; tradeoffs; values clarification; values concordance; values congruence

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32428426     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20904955

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  4 in total

1.  Don't Throw Your Heart Away: Increased Transparency of Donor Utilization Practices in Transplant Center Report Cards Alters How Center Performance Is Evaluated.

Authors:  Alison E Butler; Gretchen B Chapman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Holly O Witteman; Ruth Ndjaboue; Gratianne Vaisson; Selma Chipenda Dansokho; Bob Arnold; John F P Bridges; Sandrine Comeau; Angela Fagerlin; Teresa Gavaruzzi; Melina Marcoux; Arwen Pieterse; Michael Pignone; Thierry Provencher; Charles Racine; Dean Regier; Charlotte Rochefort-Brihay; Praveen Thokala; Marieke Weernink; Douglas B White; Celia E Wills; Jesse Jansen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Effects of an Explicit Value Clarification Method With Computer-Tailored Advice on the Effectiveness of a Web-Based Smoking Cessation Decision Aid: Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Thomas Gültzow; Eline Suzanne Smit; Rik Crutzen; Shahab Jolani; Ciska Hoving; Carmen D Dirksen
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 7.076

4.  Concordance between influential adverse treatment outcomes and localized prostate cancer treatment decisions.

Authors:  Rachel A Pozzar; Niya Xiong; Fangxin Hong; Christopher P Filson; Peter Chang; Barbara Halpenny; Donna L Berry
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 3.298

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.