Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Sep;88(3):367-72.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.06.011. Epub 2012 Jul 9.

Development of a shared decision making coding system for analysis of patient-healthcare provider encounters

Marla L Clayman  1 , Gregory Makoul, Maya M Harper, Danielle G Koby, Adam R Williams
Affiliations

Development of a shared decision making coding system for analysis of patient-healthcare provider encounters

Marla L Clayman et al. Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

Objectives: To describe the development and refinement of a scheme, detail of essential elements and participants in shared decision making (DEEP-SDM), for coding shared decision making (SDM) while reporting on the characteristics of decisions in a sample of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Methods: The evidence-based patient choice instrument was modified to reflect Makoul and Clayman's integrative model of SDM. Coding was conducted on video recordings of 20 women at the first visit with their medical oncologists after suspicion of disease progression. Noldus Observer XT v.8, a video coding software platform, was used for coding.

Results: The sample contained 80 decisions (range: 1-11), divided into 150 decision making segments. Most decisions were physician-led, although patients and physicians initiated similar numbers of decision-making conversations.

Conclusion: DEEP-SDM facilitates content analysis of encounters between women with metastatic breast cancer and their medical oncologists. Despite the fractured nature of decision making, it is possible to identify decision points and to code each of the essential elements of shared decision making. Further work should include application of DEEP-SDM to non-cancer encounters.

Practice implications: A better understanding of how decisions unfold in the medical encounter can help inform the relationship of SDM to patient-reported outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2. Elements of SDM present (n=84 decisions, 171 options)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Anatomy of a visit with multiple decisions
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Satterfield JM, Spring B, Brownson RC, Mullen EJ, Newhouse RP, Walker BB, et al. Toward a transdisciplinary model of evidence-based practice. Milbank Q. 2009;87(2):368–90. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Krumholz HM. Informed consent to promote patient-centered care. J Am Med Assoc. 2010;303(12):1190–1. - PubMed
    1. Levetown M. Communicating with children and families: from everyday interactions to skill in conveying distressing information. Pediatrics. 2008;121(5):e1441–60. - PubMed
    1. Committee on Bioethics AAoP Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):314–7. - PubMed
    1. Stacey D, Murray MA, Legare F, Sandy D, Menard P, O’Connor A. Decision coaching to support shared decision making: a framework, evidence, and implications for nursing practice, education, and policy. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2008;5(1):25–35. - PubMed

Publication types