Dataset Information

Questioning context: a set of interdisciplinary questions for investigating contextual factors affecting health decision making.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To combine insights from multiple disciplines into a set of questions that can be used to investigate contextual factors affecting health decision making.

Background

Decision-making processes and outcomes may be shaped by a range of non-medical or 'contextual' factors particular to an individual including social, economic, political, geographical and institutional conditions. Research concerning contextual factors occurs across many disciplines and theoretical domains, but few conceptual tools have attempted to integrate and translate this wide-ranging research for health decision-making purposes.

Methods

To formulate this tool we employed an iterative, collaborative process of scenario development and question generation. Five hypothetical health decision-making scenarios (preventative, screening, curative, supportive and palliative) were developed and used to generate a set of exploratory questions that aim to highlight potential contextual factors across a range of health decisions.

Findings

We present an exploratory tool consisting of questions organized into four thematic domains - Bodies, Technologies, Place and Work (BTPW) - articulating wide-ranging contextual factors relevant to health decision making. The BTPW tool encompasses health-related scholarship and research from a range of disciplines pertinent to health decision making, and identifies concrete points of intersection between its four thematic domains. Examples of the practical application of the questions are also provided.

Conclusions

These exploratory questions provide an interdisciplinary toolkit for identifying the complex contextual factors affecting decision making. The set of questions comprised by the BTPW tool may be applied wholly or partially in the context of clinical practice, policy development and health-related research.

SUBMITTER: Charise A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5060568 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Questioning context: a set of interdisciplinary questions for investigating contextual factors affecting health decision making.

Charise Andrea A Witteman Holly H Whyte Sarah S Sutton Erica J EJ Bender Jacqueline L JL Massimi Michael M Stephens Lindsay L Evans Joshua J Logie Carmen C Mirza Raza M RM Elf Marie M

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 20101028 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To combine insights from multiple disciplines into a set of questions that can be used to investigate contextual factors affecting health decision making.<h4>Background</h4>Decision-making processes and outcomes may be shaped by a range of non-medical or 'contextual' factors particular to an individual including social, economic, political, geographical and institutional conditions. Research concerning contextual factors occurs across many disciplines and theoretical domains, b ...[more]

PMID: 21029277

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite widespread use, there are few studies evaluating the consumer Choosing Wisely questions.MethodsWe evaluated the impact of the Choosing Wisely questions on consumers' decision-making outcomes. Adults living in Australia were presented with a hypothetical low-value care scenario. Using a 2×2×2 between-subjects factorial design, they were randomized to either the Choosing Wisely questions ("Questions"), a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video ("Video"), both interventions, or control (no intervention). Primary outcomes were 1) self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making and 2) intention to engage in SDM.ResultsA total of 1,439 participants (45.6% with "inadequate" health literacy) were eligible and included in the analysis. Intention to engage in SDM was higher in people randomized to the Video (mean difference [MD] = 0.24 [scale 0-6], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14, 0.35), Questions (MD = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.22), and both interventions (MD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23-0.44, P < 0.001, d = 0.28) compared with control. Combining interventions had a greater impact than presenting the Questions alone (MD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.32; P < 0.001). Those who received the Video or both interventions reported lower intention to follow the low-value treatment plan without further questioning (all P < 0.05) and more positive attitudes toward SDM (all P < 0.05) compared with control. Intervention acceptability was high in all study arms (>80%), but proactive access was low (1.7%-20.8%). Compared with control, participants who received one or both interventions asked more questions that mapped to the Choosing Wisely questions (all P < .001). There were no main effects of either intervention on self-efficacy or knowledge.ConclusionsThe Choosing Wisely questions and a video to promote SDM may improve intention to engage in SDM and support patients in identifying questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign (with some additional benefits of the video intervention).Trial registrationANZCTR376477.HighlightsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial online with adults living in Australia to test the effectiveness of the consumer Choosing Wisely questions and a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video.Both interventions improved intention to engage in SDM and supported participants to identify questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign.There were some additional benefits of the Video intervention in reducing willingness to accept low-value treatment for low-back pain without asking questions; however, neither intervention changed participants' self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making nor affected perceptions of preparedness to engage in SDM or knowledge of rights to be involved in health care decision-making.The simple, low-cost nature of the interventions may make them appropriate for implementation within a suite of approaches to address low-value care at a population level.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict. METHODS:An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people's decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them. RESULTS:In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict. CONCLUSION:Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people.

Project description:PurposeTo identify the most important factors affecting physician decision-making regarding antiplatelet therapy.MethodsWe retrospectively gathered data from minor ischemic stroke patients with NIHSS scores ≤ 5 within 72 h of onset from 2010 to 2018. The population was divided into four groups by initial antiplatelet therapy: aspirin monotherapy (AM), dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a loading dose of clopidogrel (clopidogrel loading dose of 300 mg on the first day; DAPT-ALC), dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and no loading dose of clopidogrel (clopidogrel 75 mg daily, no loading dose; DAPT-AUC), and clopidogrel monotherapy (CM).ResultsIn total, 1,377 patients were included in the analysis (excluding patients who accepted thrombolytic drugs, participated in other clinical trials, or had not used antiplatelet drugs). The mean ± S.D. age was 62.0 ± 12.7 years; 973 (70.7%) patients were male. The four groups were AM (n = 541, 39.3%), DAPT-ALC (n = 474, 34.4%), DAPT- AUC (n = 301, 21.9%), and CM (n = 61, 4.4%). Patients receiving antiplatelet monotherapy were older than those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (63.7-65.7 vs. 59.6-61.4 years), and the median initial systolic blood pressure level was higher in the DAPT-ALC group than in the other groups (all P < 0.05). Patients under 75 years old with an admission SBP lower than 180 mmHg, a history of AM, coronary heart disease, no history of intracerebral hemorrhage, stroke onset occurring after guideline recommendations were updated (the year of 2015), onset-to-arrival time within 24 h, and initial NIHSS score ≤ 3 were more likely to take DAPT-ALC than AM. Compared with DAPT-ALC, DAPT-AUC was associated with an initial SBP level lower than 180 mmHg, a history of smoking, hypertension, no history of ICH, previous treatment with antihypertensives, and onset year after the recommendations were updated.ConclusionsMany factors affect doctors' decisions regarding antiplatelet therapy, especially guidelines, age, admission SBP level, and hypertensive disease.

Dataset Information

Questioning context: a set of interdisciplinary questions for investigating contextual factors affecting health decision making.

Objective

Background

Methods

Findings

Conclusions

Publications

Questioning context: a set of interdisciplinary questions for investigating contextual factors affecting health decision making.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets