How to Trip Rapid Review

Step 1: Select articles relevant to your search (remember the system is only optimised for single intervention studies)

Step 2: press

Step 3: review the result, and maybe amend the or if you know better! If we're unsure of the overall sentiment of the trial we will display the conclusion under the article title. We then require you to tell us what the correct sentiment is.

13,996 results for

E/M Medical Decision Making

by
...
Alerts

Export results

Use check boxes to select individual results below

SmartSearch available

Trip's SmartSearch engine has discovered connected searches & results. Click to show

21. Which instruments are used to measure shared, supported and assisted healthcare decision-making between patients who have limited, impaired or fluctuating capacity, their family carers and healthcare professionals? A systematic review protocol Full Text available with Trip Pro

, Sepucha K, et al. : Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011; 105 (4): 313–324. | Schwappach DL: Review: engaging patients as vigilant partners in safety: a systematic review. Med Care Res Rev. 2010; 67 (2): 119–148. | Simon D, Loh A, Härter M: Measuring (shared) decision-making--a review of psychometric instruments. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2007; 101 (4): 259–267. | Tullo ES, Young TJ, Lee RP: Medical students’ views about person (...) ( ). Patient participation in care planning and treatment decision-making is the result of a cultural shift in historically paternalistic healthcare settings ( ). This shift recognises the importance of considering patients’ will and preferences in the development of care plans and decision-making related to medical treatment choices ( ). The research evidence has highlighted that informed patients and families, receptive healthcare professionals, as well as coordinated and supportive healthcare

2019 HRB open research

22. Hospital Formularies Decision-Making Process

Hospital Formularies Decision-Making Process Hospital Formularies Decision-Making Process | CADTH.ca Find the information you need Hospital Formularies Decision-Making Process Hospital Formularies Decision-Making Process Published on: March 16, 2015 Project Number: ES0290 Product Line: Issue: 47 Result type: Report Context In Canada, hospital-based Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees may function at an individual hospital level, district or regional health authority level, or provincial level (...) assurance representatives and members of the public. 1 Formulary decisions are made on the basis of empirical evidence; however, factors such as safety of similar available agents, direct costs, cost offsets, and the total cost of care with a new drug compared with current care may also significantly impact formulary decisions. 2 CADTH provides recommendations to the federal, provincial, and territorial public drug plans (hereafter the "public drug plans") to support their formulary decision-making

2016 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health - Environmental Scanning

23. A Framework for Evaluating a Minor’s Involvement in Medical Decision Making Full Text available with Trip Pro

A Framework for Evaluating a Minor’s Involvement in Medical Decision Making 29466124 2019 02 21 2019 02 21 1536-0075 18 3 2018 03 The American journal of bioethics : AJOB Am J Bioeth A Framework for Evaluating a Minor's Involvement in Medical Decision Making. 10-12 10.1080/15265161.2017.1418938 Snyder Donna L DL a Food and Drug Administration. Nelson Robert M RM a Food and Drug Administration. eng FD999999 ImFDA Intramural FDA HHS United States Journal Article Comment United States Am J (...) Bioeth 100898738 1526-5161 E IM Am J Bioeth. 2018 Mar;18(3):4-9 29466136 Abortion, Induced Child Clinical Decision-Making Humans Minors 2018 2 22 6 0 2018 2 22 6 0 2019 2 23 6 0 ppublish 29466124 10.1080/15265161.2017.1418938 PMC5997482 NIHMS971519 Pediatrics. 1995 Feb;95(2):314-7 7838658 Pediatrics. 2016 Aug;138(2):null 27456510 Am J Bioeth. 2018 Mar;18(3):4-9 29466136

2018 The American journal of bioethics : AJOB

24. Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-making

Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-making Victoria Blessing | Anoushka Davé | Peter Varnai HEALTH EVIDENCE NETWORK SYNTHESIS REPORT 54 Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-makingThe Health Evidence Network HEN – the Health Evidence Network – is an information service for public health decision-makers in the WHO European Region, in action since 2003 and initiated and coordinated by the WHO Regional Office for Europe (...) under the umbrella of the European Health Information Initiative (a multipartner network coordinating all health information activities in the WHO European Region). HEN supports public health decision-makers to use the best available evidence in their own decision- making and aims to ensure links between evidence, health policies and improvements in public health. The HEN synthesis report series provides summaries of what is known about the policy issue, the gaps in the evidence and the areas

2017 WHO Health Evidence Network

25. Understanding Health-Systems? Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decision making

their decisionmaking. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients. This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the authors (...) Understanding Health-Systems? Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decision making White Paper Understanding Health -Systems’ Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decisionmaking Research White Paper Understanding Health -Systems’ Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decisionmaking Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 www.ahrq.gov Contract No. 290-2015-0012-I and 290-2015-00004-I Prepared

2017 Effective Health Care Program (AHRQ)

26. Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-making

Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-making Victoria Blessing | Anoushka Davé | Peter Varnai HEALTH EVIDENCE NETWORK SYNTHESIS REPORT 54 Evidence on mechanisms and tools for use of health information for decision-makingThe Health Evidence Network HEN – the Health Evidence Network – is an information service for public health decision-makers in the WHO European Region, in action since 2003 and initiated and coordinated by the WHO Regional Office for Europe (...) under the umbrella of the European Health Information Initiative (a multipartner network coordinating all health information activities in the WHO European Region). HEN supports public health decision-makers to use the best available evidence in their own decision- making and aims to ensure links between evidence, health policies and improvements in public health. The HEN synthesis report series provides summaries of what is known about the policy issue, the gaps in the evidence and the areas

2017 WHO Health Evidence Network

27. Shared decision-making when choosing the feeding method of patients with severe dementia: a systematic review Full Text available with Trip Pro

, Baumgratz TD, Cuziol M. Shared decision making in Brazil: history and current discussion. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundh. 2011;105(4):240-4. [ ] 23 Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Couper MP, Singer E, Levin CA, Fowler Jr. FJ, Ziniel S, et al. The DECISIONS study: a nationwide survey of United States adults regarding 9 common medical decisions. Med Decis Mak [Internet]. 2010 [acesso em 30 ago. 2017];30(5 Suppl):20-34. Disponível em: [ ] 24 Durand MA, Carpenter L, Dolan H, Bravo P, Mann M, Bunn F, et al. Do (...) provide benefits for caregivers/patients undergoing the difficult task of deciding about feeding methods. Findings suggest that the current quality of decision-making is inadequate. Keywords: Dementia; Deglutition Disorders; Decision Making; Decision Support Techniques. Objetivos: Avaliar se o uso de instrumento de apoio para decisão compartilhada na escolha da via de alimentação em pacientes com demência em estágio grave traz benefício para a díade paciente/cuidador e avaliar a qualidade do processo

2018 Revista Brasileira de Geriatria e Gerontologia

28. Using Systematic Review and Evidence Banking to Increase Uptake and Use of Aquatic Science in Decision-Making Full Text available with Trip Pro

experimental biology and ecology can support evidence‐based decisionmaking in conservation: Avoiding pitfalls and enabling application . Conserv. Physiol. 5 : 1 – 14 . . Dicks L.V. , N. Haddaway , M. Hernández‐Morcillo , B. Mattsson , N. Randall , P. Failler , J. Ferretti , B. Livoreil , H. Saarikoski , L. Santamaria , R. Rodela , E. Velizarova , and H. Wittmer . 2017 . Knowledge synthesis for environmental decisions: An evaluation of existing methods, and guidance for their selection, use and development (...) , because these designs are not often considered explicitly in established study quality approaches from medicine. Furthermore, even more rapid methods that have been developed to at least partially address the time investment challenge typically require months to complete (Collins et al. ). If SR is the “gold standard” for determining what we know about a specific scientific or management question and then applying this knowledge to decisionmaking, the factors contributing to the “time challenge” must

2018 Limnology and Oceanography Bulletin

29. HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma Full Text available with Trip Pro

HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology"/> HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and the American Society (...) of Clinical Oncology | Journal of Clinical Oncology Search in: Menu Article Tools ASCO SPECIAL ARTICLE Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS COMPANION ARTICLES No companion articles ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.4836 Journal of Clinical Oncology - published online before print November 14, 2016 PMID: HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and the American Society

2016 American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines

30. HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma

HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma CAP Laboratory Improvement Programs HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology Angela N. Bartley, MD; Mary Kay Washington, MD, PhD; Christina B. Ventura, MT(ASCP); Nofisat Ismaila, MD; Carol Colasacco, MLIS, SCT(ASCP); Al B. Benson III, MD; Alfredo (...) . Objectives.—To establish an evidence-based guideline for HER2 testing in patients with GEA, to formalize the algorithms for methods to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing while addressing which patients and tumor speci- mens are appropriate, and to provide guidance on clinical decision making. Design.—The College of American Pathologists, Amer- ican Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an expert panel to conduct a systematic review of the literature

2016 College of American Pathologists

31. The use of simulation modeling to inform health system and policy decision-making in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review protocol (Preprint) Full Text available with Trip Pro

, and missing data will be requested from the study authors as needed. The validation of a simulation model is an important determinant of the risk of bias and applicability of a simulation model. All models will be assessed in accordance with the guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research-Society for Medical Decision Making (ISPOR-SMDM) report [ ]. From the literature review, several tools were identified to assist model developers and users with model validation (...) modeling good research practices task force-7. Value Health 2012 1;15(6):843-850 [ ] [ ] [ ] Moberg J, Oxman AD, Rosenbaum S, Schünemann HJ, Guyatt G, Flottorp S, for the GRADE Working Group. The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions. Health Res Policy Syst 2018 29;16(1):45. [ ] [ ] Hanney SR, Gonzalez-Block MA, Buxton MJ, Kogan M. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Res Policy Syst

2020 JMIR Research Protocols

32. Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review Full Text available with Trip Pro

Open Access Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review Corresponding Author Department of General Surgery, Complexo Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, Granada, Spain Correspondence Marta Maes‐Carballo, Department of General Surgery, Calle Ramon Puga Noguerol, 54, 32005 Ourense, Spain. Email: Department of General Surgery, Hospital de (...) overall quality in analysing the decisionmaking process in BC treatment (Appendix ). In the United States of America, we highlighted two of the 'American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)' - guidelines and the last version of NCCN , but with a lower mark if you compare with the ones we named before. In Europe, we found the 'European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)' , the 'Asociación Española de Cirujanos (AEC)' and the 'ABS‐BAPRAS' CPGs with a score of 6 as the best paradigm of a guide

2020 Health Expectations

33. Measures of evidence-informed decision-making competence attributes: a psychometric systematic review Full Text available with Trip Pro

University Press; 2015. 26. American Educational Research Association. American Psychological Association, National Council on measurement in education. The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, D.C: American Educational Research Association; 2014. 27. Belita E, Yost J, Squires JE, Ganann R, Burnett T, Dobbins M. Measures assessing attributes of evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) competence among nurses: a systematic review protocol. Syst Rev. 2018;7(181):8. 28. Guyatt GH (...) medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71–2. 3. Culyer AJ, Lomas J. Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision-making in health care: do they work and how might we know? Evidence Policy. 2006;2(3):357–71. 4. Rycroft-Malone J. The PARIHS framework--a framework for guiding the implementation of evidence-based practice. J Nurs Care Qual. 2004;19(4):297–304. 5. Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Titchen A, Harvey G, Kitson A, McCormack B. What counts as evidence in evidence-based

2020 BMC nursing

34. Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review Full Text available with Trip Pro

. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. 1922;85(1):87–94. 51. Adarkwah CC, Jegan N, Heinzel-Gutenbrunner M, Kühne F, Siebert U, Popert U, et al. Time-to-event versus ten-year-absolute-risk in cardiovascular risk prevention–does it make a difference? Results from the Optimizing-Risk-Communication (OptRisk) randomized-controlled trial. BMC medical informatics and decision making. 2016;16(1):152. pmid:27899103 52. Almario CV, Chey WD, Khanna D, Mosadeghi S, Ahmed S, Afghani E, et al. Impact of National (...) Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation, Quebec, Canada, Population Health and Practice-Changing Research Group, Université Laval Primary Care Research Centre (CERSSPL-UL), Quebec, Canada, Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada, Quebec SPOR SUPPORT UNIT, Quebec, Canada Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing * E-mail: Affiliations Canada

2020 PloS one

35. The clinical significance of routine risk categorization in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and its impact on treatment decision-making: a systematic review Full Text available with Trip Pro

The clinical significance of routine risk categorization in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and its impact on treatment decision-making: a systematic review The clinical significance of routine risk categorization in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and its impact on treatment decision-making: a systematic review | Future Oncology We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our . Login to your account Email: Password Keep me logged in Change Password (...) an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username Quick Search in Journals Enter words / phrases / DOI / ISBN / keywords / authors / etc Search Search Quick Search anywhere Enter words / phrases / DOI / ISBN / keywords / authors / etc Search Search Systematic Review Open Access The clinical significance of routine risk categorization in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and its impact on treatment decision-making: a systematic review , , , & *Author for correspondence

2020 Future Oncology

36. Factors that influence vaccination decision-making among pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis Full Text available with Trip Pro

Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing – review & editing Affiliations Department of Infectious Diseases Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Topical Medicine, London, United Kingdom, Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America Factors that influence vaccination decision-making among pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis Eliz Kilich, Sara Dada, Mark R. Francis (...) powerful, may be muted by other factors. This requires further research, particularly when vaccines are novel. Public health campaigns which centre on the protectiveness and safety of a maternal vaccine rather than disease threat alone may prove beneficial. Citation: Kilich E, Dada S, Francis MR, Tazare J, Chico RM, Paterson P, et al. (2020) Factors that influence vaccination decision-making among pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 15(7): e0234827. https://doi.org/10.1371

2020 PloS one

37. Interventions that Facilitate Shared Decision-Making in Cancers with Active Surveillance as Treatment Option: a Systematic Review of Literature Full Text available with Trip Pro

-making for localized prostate cancer. Patient Education & Counseling. 2017;100(2):267–75. . 33. Cuypers M, Lamers RED, Kil PJM, van de Poll-Franse LV, de Vries M. Impact of a web-based prostate cancer treatment decision aid on patient-reported decision process parameters: results from the prostate cancer patient centered care trial. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(11):3739–48. . 34. Onel E, Hamond C, Wasson JH, Berlin BB, Ely MG, Laudone VP et al. Assessment of the feasibility and impact of shared (...) that Facilitate Shared Decision-Making in Cancers with Active Surveillance as Treatment Option: a Systematic Review of Literature , , , , , & volume 22 , Article number: 101 ( 2020 ) 583 Accesses 1 Altmetric Abstract Purpose of review Medical decisions concerning active surveillance are complex, especially when evidence on superiority of one of the treatments is lacking. Decision aids have been developed to facilitate shared decision-making on whether to pursue an active surveillance strategy. However

2020 Current oncology reports

38. Are We Involving Patients in Shared Decision-Making in Young Adult Hip Surgery? A Systematic Review of Patient Engagement Initiatives in Hip Preservation Full Text available with Trip Pro

Alokozai is medical student at Tulane University School of Medicine. He was previously awarded the Dell Medical School Value-Based Care Delivery Summer Fellowship, where he investigated topics relevant to designing, implementing, and disseminating value-based care delivery models in orthopaedic surgery. His research interests include healthcare transformation, value-based healthcare, and patient-centered experience (shared decision-making, decision tools, patient engagement). David N Bernstein (...) or cognition were excluded from the study. Enrollment occurred at both an academic medical center and private clinic. Average age was not reported, but age range was 26 to 50 years. Pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, and activity restrictions were statistically significant ( P < .05) variables correlated with treatment decision-making. Discussion Treatment of hip preservation among young adults can be preference sensitive, where both operative and nonoperative

2020 Journal of Patient Experience

39. Systematic Reviews of Preclinical Animal Studies can Make Significant Contributions to Health Care and More Transparent Translational Medicine Full Text available with Trip Pro

Library website. Cancel Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display Reviews Protocols Systematic reviews of preclinical animal studies can make significant contributions to health care and more transparent translational medicine Editorial | version published: 28 March 2014 Jason Snyder, via Wikimedia Commons CC‐BY‐2.0 Preclinical evidence, like clinical evidence, is used to inform decisions about the safety (...) reviews of preclinical animal studies to aid making better well‐informed decisions about health care. Anyone interested in this methods group may contact the first author. Information DOI: Database: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Published: 28 March 2014 Copyright: Copyright © 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Article Metrics Altmetric: Topics Methodology Authors SYRCLE, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands More by this author

2014 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

40. A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions

A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions O'Hara R, Johnson M, Hirst E, Weyman A, Shaw D, Mortimer P, Newman C, Storey M, Turner J, Mason S, Quinn T, Shewan J, Siriwardena N Record Status This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA (...) . No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database. Citation O'Hara R, Johnson M, Hirst E, Weyman A, Shaw D, Mortimer P, Newman C, Storey M, Turner J, Mason S, Quinn T, Shewan J, Siriwardena N. A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions. Health Services and Delivery Research 2014; 2(56) Authors' objectives The aim of this study was to qualitatively examine potential system-wide influences on decision-making in the ambulance service

2015 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.

To help you find the content you need quickly, you can filter your results via the categories on the right-hand side >>>>