cris.boxmetadata.label.title
Collaborative deliberation: A model for patient care
cris.boxmetadata.label.dateissued
01 browse.startsWith.months.november 2014
cris.boxmetadata.label.accesslevel
metadata only access
cris.boxmetadata.label.resourcetype
journal article
cris.boxmetadata.label.authors
Elwyn G.
Lloyd A.
May C.
van der Weijden T.
Stiggelbout A.
Edwards A.
Frosch D.L.
Rapley T.
Barr P.
Walsh T.
Grande S.W.
Epstein R.
Mayo Clinic
cris.boxmetadata.label.publisher
Elsevier Ireland Ltd
cris.boxmetadata.label.abstract
Objective: Existing theoretical work in decision making and behavior change has focused on how individuals arrive at decisions or form intentions. Less attention has been given to theorizing the requirements that might be necessary for individuals to work collaboratively to address difficult decisions, consider new alternatives, or change behaviors. The goal of this work was to develop, as a forerunner to a middle range theory, a conceptual model that considers the process of supporting patients to consider alternative health care options, in collaboration with clinicians, and others. Methods: Theory building among researchers with experience and expertise in clinician-patient communication, using an iterative cycle of discussions. Results: We developed a model composed of five inter-related propositions that serve as a foundation for clinical communication processes that honor the ethical principles of respecting individual agency, autonomy, and an empathic approach to practice. We named the model 'collaborative deliberation.' The propositions describe: (1) constructive interpersonal engagement, (2) recognition of alternative actions, (3) comparative learning, (4) preference construction and elicitation, and (5) preference integration. Conclusions: We believe the model underpins multiple suggested approaches to clinical practice that take the form of patient centered care, motivational interviewing, goal setting, action planning, and shared decision making.
cris.boxmetadata.label.citationstartpage
158
cris.boxmetadata.label.citationendpage
164
cris.boxmetadata.label.volume
97
cris.boxmetadata.label.issue
2
cris.boxmetadata.label.language
English
cris.boxmetadata.label.ocdeknowledgeArea
Políticas de salud, Servicios de salud Ética
cris.boxmetadata.label.doi
cris.boxmetadata.label.scopusidentifier
2-s2.0-84908208902
cris.boxmetadata.label.pubmedidentifier
cris.boxmetadata.label.source
Patient Education and Counseling
cris.boxmetadata.label.containerissn
07383991
cris.boxmetadata.label.sponsor
In addition to the authors listed, Danielle Timmermans, Marije Koelewijn, and Marjan Faber attended the seminars in Maastricht. Helpful changes to this article were provided by Arianna Blaine, Aileen Lem, and Robin Paradis Montibello. This work was given financial support by the School for Public Health and Primary Care Research CAPHRI, Maastricht University , where Glyn Elwyn was a visiting professor (2009–2011). The work was also supported by the Dartmouth Center for Health Care Delivery Science. Glyn Elwyn provides consultancy for Emmi Solutions, USA and has received research funding from numerous research bodies, including the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation, Boston. Adrian Edwards, Ronald Epstein, Dominick L. Frosch, Amy Lloyd, Trudy van der Weijden, Anne Stiggelbout, Carl May, Tim Rapley, Paul Barr, Stuart W. Grande, Thom Walsh, Victor Montori have not declared any financial conflicts of interest.
peru-layout.shadow-copies Directorio de Producción Científica Scopus