Title
Basing information on comprehensive, critically appraised, and up-to-date syntheses of the scientific evidence: A quality dimension of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards
Date Issued
29 November 2013
Access level
open access
Resource Type
review
Author(s)
Mayo Clinic
Publisher(s)
BioMed Central Ltd
Abstract
Background: Patients and clinicians expect patient decision aids to be based on the best available research evidence. Since 2005, this expectation has translated into a quality dimension of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. Methods. We reviewed the 2005 standards and the available literature on the evidence base of decision aids as well as searched for parallel activities in which evidence is brought to bear to inform clinical decisions. In conducting this work, we noted emerging and research issues that require attention and may inform this quality dimension in the future. Results: This dimension requires patient decision aids to be based on research evidence about the relevant options and the nature and likelihood of their effect on outcomes that matter to patients. The synthesis of evidence should be comprehensive and up-to-date, and the evidence itself subject to critical appraisal. Ethical (informed patient choice), quality-of-care (patient-centered care), and scientific (evidence-based medicine) arguments justify this requirement. Empirical evidence suggests that over two thirds of available decision aids are based on high-quality evidence syntheses. Emerging issues identified include the duties of developers regarding the conduct of systematic reviews, the impact of comparative effectiveness research, their link with guidelines based on the same evidence, and how to present the developers' confidence in the estimates to the end-users. Systematic application of the GRADE system, common in contemporary practice guideline development, could enhance satisfaction of this dimension. Conclusions: While theoretical and practical issues remained to be addressed, high-quality patient decision aids should adhere to this dimension requiring they be based on comprehensive and up-to-date summaries of critically appraised evidence. © 2013 Montori et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Volume
13
Issue
SUPPL. 2
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Ciencias del cuidado de la salud y servicios (administración de hospitales, financiamiento)
Políticas de salud, Servicios de salud
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-84889673693
PubMed ID
Source
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
ISSN of the container
14726947
DOI of the container
10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S5
Source funding
Mayo Clinic
Center for Science of Healthcare Delivery
Informed Medical Decisions Foundation
Sponsor(s)
Publication of this supplement was funded by an unrestricted grant from the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation and by the Center for Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic (Montori). Administrative and editorial support for this supplement was provided by The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. This article has been published as part of BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making Volume 13 Supplement 2, 2013: The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration’s Quality Dimensions: Theoretical Rationales, Current Evidence, and Emerging Issues. The full contents of the supplement are available online at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmedinformdecismak/supplements/13/S2.
Sources of information:
Directorio de Producción Científica
Scopus