Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorMaes Carballo, Marta
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz-Núñez, Isabel
dc.contributor.authorMartín-Díaz, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorMignini, Luciano
dc.contributor.authorBueno-Cavanillas, Aurora
dc.contributor.authorKhan, Khalid Saeed
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-23T08:55:34Z
dc.date.available2022-03-23T08:55:34Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn1369-6513
dc.identifier.otherhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32748514es
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11940/16378
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: It is not clear whether clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are adequately promoting shared decision making (SDM). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the recommendations about SDM in CPGs and CSs concerning breast cancer (BC) treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: Following protocol registration (Prospero no.: CRD42018106643), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2010 to December 2019. INCLUSION CRITERIA: CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were selected whether published in a journal or in an online document. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was developed and used to extract data in duplicate. MAIN RESULTS: There were 167 relevant CPGs (139) and CSs (28); SDM was reported in only 40% of the studies. SDM was reported more often in recent publications after 2015 (42/101 (41.6 %) vs 46/66 (69.7 %), P = .0003) but less often in medical journal publications (44/101 (43.5 %) vs 17/66 (25.7 %), P = .009). In CPGs and CSs with SDM, only 8/66 (12%) met one-fifth (6 of 31) of the quality items; only 14/66 (8%) provided clear and precise SDM recommendations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: SDM descriptions and recommendations in CPGs and CSs concerning BC treatment need improvement. SDM was more frequently reported in CPGs and CSs in recent years, but surprisingly it was less often covered in medical journals, a feature that needs attention.en
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.meshLanguage*
dc.subject.meshHumans*
dc.subject.meshConsensus*
dc.subject.meshDecision Making*
dc.titleShared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.en
dc.typeJournal Articlees
dc.authorsophosMaes-Carballo, Marta;Muñoz-Núñez, Isabel;Martín-Díaz, Manuel;Mignini, Luciano;Bueno-Cavanillas, Aurora;Khan, Khalid Saeed
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/hex.13112
dc.identifier.pmid32748514
dc.identifier.sophos36832
dc.issue.number5es
dc.journal.titleHEALTH EXPECTATIONSes
dc.organizationServizo Galego de Saúde::Estrutura de Xestión Integrada (EOXI)::EOXI de Ourense, Verín e O Barco de Valdeorras - Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense::Cirurxía Xeral e dixestivaes
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccess
dc.subject.decstoma de decisión*
dc.subject.decslenguaje*
dc.subject.decsconsenso*
dc.subject.decshumanos*
dc.subject.keywordCHUOes
dc.typefidesArtículo de Revisiónes
dc.typesophosArtículo de Revisiónes
dc.volume.number23es


Ficheros en el ítem

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Atribución 4.0 Internacional