BACKGROUND: Icon arrays have been shown to be an effective method for communicating medical risk information. However, in practice, icon arrays used to visualize personal risks often differ in the type and color of the icons. The aim of this study was to examine the influence of icon type and color on the perception and recall of cardiovascular risk, as little is known about how color affects the perception of icon arrays.
METHODS: A total of 866 participants aged 40 to 90 years representative of the German population in terms of gender and age completed an online experiment. Using a 2 × 2 between-subjects design, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 experimental groups. They received their hypothetical 10-year cardiovascular risk using an icon array that varied by icon type (smiley v. person) and color (black/white v. red/yellow). We measured risk perception, emotional response, intentions of taking action to reduce the risk (e.g., increasing one\'s physical activity), risk recall, and graph evaluation/trustworthiness, as well as numeracy and graphical literacy.
RESULTS: Icon arrays using person icons were evaluated more positively. There was no effect of icons or color on risk perception, emotional response, intentions of taking action to reduce the risk, or trustworthiness of the graph. While more numerate/graphical literate participants were more likely to correctly recall the presented risk estimate, icon type and color did not influence the probability of correct recall.
CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the perception of the tested icon arrays were rather small, suggesting that they may be equally suitable for communicating medical risks. Further research on the robustness of these results across other colors, icons, and risk domains could add to guidelines on the design of visual aids.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of different icons and colors did not influence the perception and the probability of recalling the 10-year cardiovascular risk, the emotional response, or the intentions to reduce the presented risk.Icon arrays with person icons were evaluated more positively.There was no evidence to suggest that the effectiveness of the studied icon arrays varied based on individuals\' levels of numerical or graphical literacy, nor did it differ between people with or without a history of CVD or on medication for an increased CVD risk.

The relevant regulations for preparing ventilator-dependent patients for discharge to institutions or home care are cumbersome and there are numerous health and education materials, which make family members confused and make the decision to discharge very difficult. The purpose of this study is to explore the use of ventilator-dependent family members in critical care units. Discussion on the pressure before and after \"Discharge Decision Assistance System web APP\".

BACKGROUND: Decision aids (DAs) have been proposed to support patients and families with disease information processing and decision-making, but their effectiveness for critically ill patients and their families is incompletely understood.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of the DAs on the prognosis of critically ill patients and knowledge, anxiety, depression and decisional conflict of their family members.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic search of literature using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database, Scopus, PsycNet, CNKI and Wanfang Database from the inception of the databases until May 2023 to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) describing DAs interventions targeted at adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients or their families. We also searched grey literature in four databases: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, Chinese Cochrane Center, Open Grey and GreyNet International.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included in the review. Meta-analysis identified longer hospital length of stay (LOS) among all patients compared with usual care (mean difference [MD] = 5.64 days, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.29, 10.98], p = .04), but not in surviving patients (MD = 2.09 days, 95% CI [-3.70, 7.89], p = .48). However, there was no evidence of an effect of DAs on hospital mortality (RR = 1.25, 95% CI [0.92, 1.70], p = .15), ICU LOS (MD = 3.77 days, 95% CI [-0.17, 7.70], p = .06) and length of mechanical ventilation (MD = 0.88 days, 95% CI [-2.22, 3.97], p = .58). DAs led to a statistically significant improvement in family members\' knowledge (standard mean difference = 0.84, 95% CI [0.12, 1.56], p = .02). We found no significant effect of DAs on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, decisional conflict and quality of communication of family members.
CONCLUSIONS: This review provides effective evidence that DAs can potentially improve the knowledge level of family members while prolonging the hospital LOS among critically ill patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Well-designed large-scale studies with DAs tailored to the individuals\' preferences and existing cultural values are warranted.

BACKGROUND: This paper outlines the design, implementation, and usability study results of the patient empowerment process for chronic disease management, using Patient Reported Outcome Measurements and Shared Decision-Making Processes.
BACKGROUND: The ADLIFE project aims to develop innovative, digital health solutions to support personalized, integrated care for patients with severe long-term conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and/or Chronic Heart Failure. Successful long-term management of patients with chronic conditions requires active patient self-management and a proactive involvement of patients in their healthcare and treatment. This calls for a patient-provider partnership within an integrated system of collaborative care, supporting self-management, shared-decision making, collection of patient reported outcome measures, education, and follow-up.
METHODS: ADLIFE follows an outcome-based and patient-centered approach where PROMs represent an especially valuable tool to evaluate the outcomes of the care delivered. We have selected 11 standardized PROMs for evaluating the most recent patients\' clinical context, enabling the decision-making process, and personalized care planning. The ADLIFE project implements the \"SHARE approach\' for enabling shared decision-making via two digital platforms for healthcare professionals and patients. We have successfully integrated PROMs and shared decision-making processes into our digital toolbox, based on an international interoperability standard, namely HL7 FHIR. A usability study was conducted with 3 clinical sites with 20 users in total to gather feedback and to subsequently prioritize updates to the ADLIFE toolbox.
RESULTS: User satisfaction is measured in the QUIS7 questionnaire on a 9-point scale in the following aspects: overall reaction, screen, terminology and tool feedback, learning, multimedia, training material and system capabilities. With all the average scores above 6 in all categories, most respondents have a positive reaction to the ADLIFE PEP platform and find it easy to use. We have identified shortcomings and have prioritized updates to the platform before clinical pilot studies are initiated.
CONCLUSIONS: Having finalized design, implementation, and pre-deployment usability studies, and updated the tool based on further feedback, our patient empowerment mechanisms enabled via PROMs and shared decision-making processes are ready to be piloted in clinal settings. Clinical studies will be conducted based at six healthcare settings across Spain, UK, Germany, Denmark, and Israel.

BACKGROUND: Nominal group technique (NGT) is widely used in healthcare research to facilitate decision-making and consensus-building. Traditional NGT requires face-to-face interaction and its limitations include potential biases, logistical challenges and high costs. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a shift to virtual methods, which led to the development of virtual nominal group technique (vNGT). Aim To reflect on the use of vNGT, particularly in the context of Ghader et al (2023 ), to understand its effectiveness in overcoming the limitations of traditional NGT and on its applicability in pandemic-affected scenarios.
METHODS: This paper reviews and discusses literature on the use and effectiveness of NGT compared to other consensus-building methods and examines the emergence of vNGT in overcoming the limitations of traditional NGT. The authors also reflect on their use of vNGT in a study to identify cardiovascular research priorities in the UAE and provide details of its implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: vNGT bridges the gap between the localised nature of traditional NGT and the global reach of the Delphi technique. It allows for the inclusion of diverse participants, saves costs and offers time-efficiency. The study demonstrated vNGT\'s adaptability, with participants engaging in idea generation, discussion and prioritisation using online tools. However, challenges persist with vNGT, including reduced accessibility for certain demographics, timing issues across time zones and technical difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: vNGT successfully integrates the interactive, consensus-building aspects of NGT with the broad reach of Delphi. It can be valuable in research and decision-making, especially in an era of increased remote collaboration.
CONCLUSIONS: vNGT can significantly impact healthcare research and policy formulation by enabling more inclusive, cost-effective and timely consensus-building processes. However, considerations for accessibility and technical support are crucial for its wider adoption and effectiveness.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an increasingly implemented patient-centered approach to navigating patient preferences regarding diagnostic and treatment options and supported decision-making. This therapeutic approach prioritizes the patient\'s perspectives, considering current medical evidence to provide a balanced approach to clinical scenarios. In light of numerous recent guideline recommendations that are conditional in nature and are clinical scenarios defined by preference-sensitive care options, there is a tremendous opportunity for SDM and validated decision aids. Despite the expansion of the literature on SDM, formal acceptance among clinicians remains inconsistent. Surprisingly, a significant disparity exists between clinicians\' self-reported adherence to SDM principles and patients\' perceptions of its implementation during clinical encounters. This discrepancy underscores a fundamental issue in the delivery of health care, where clinicians may overestimate their integration of SDM, while patients\' experiences suggest otherwise. This review critically examines the factors contributing to this inconsistency, including barriers within the health care system, clinician attitudes and behaviors, and patient expectations and preferences. By elucidating these factors in the fields of food allergy, asthma, eosinophilic esophagitis, and other allergic diseases, this review aims to provide insights into bridging the gap between clinician perception and patient experience in SDM. Addressing this discordance is crucial for advancing patient-centered care and ensuring that SDM is not merely a theoretical concept but a tangible reality in the.

BACKGROUND: Web-based decision aids have been shown to have a positive effect when used to improve the quality of decision-making for women facing postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR). However, the existing findings regarding these interventions are still incongruent, and the overall effect is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the content of web-based decision aids and its impact on decision-related outcomes (ie, decision conflict, decision regret, informed choice, and knowledge), psychological-related outcomes (ie, satisfaction and anxiety), and surgical decision-making in women facing PMBR.
METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 6 databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched starting at the time of establishment of the databases to May 2023, and an updated search was conducted on April 1, 2024. MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and text words were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS: In total, 7 studies included 579 women and were published between 2008 and 2023, and the sample size in each study ranged from 26 to 222. The results showed that web-based decision aids used audio and video to present the pros and cons of PMBR versus no PMBR, implants versus flaps, and immediate versus delayed PMBR and the appearance and feel of the PMBR results and the expected recovery time with photographs of actual patients. Web-based decision aids help improve PMBR knowledge, decisional conflict (mean difference [MD]=-5.43, 95% CI -8.87 to -1.99; P=.002), and satisfaction (standardized MD=0.48, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.95; P=.05) but have no effect on informed choice (MD=-2.80, 95% CI -8.54 to 2.94; P=.34), decision regret (MD=-1.55, 95% CI -6.00 to 2.90 P=.49), or anxiety (standardized MD=0.04, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.58; P=.88). The overall Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation quality of the evidence was low.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the web-based decision aids provide a modern, low-cost, and high dissemination rate effective method to promote the improved quality of decision-making in women undergoing PMBR.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42023450496; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=450496.

Objectives Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is increasingly adopted for critically ill patients diagnosed with acute kidney injury, but the optimal time for initiation remains unclear and prognosis is uncertain, leading to medical complexity, ethical conflicts, and decision dilemmas in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. This study aimed to develop a decision aid (DA) for the family surrogate of critically ill patients to support their engagement in shared decision-making process with clinicians. Methods Development of DA employed a systematic process with user-centered design (UCD) principle, which included: (i) competitive analysis: searched, screened, and assessed the existing DAs to gather insights for design strategies, developmental techniques, and functionalities; (ii) user needs assessment: interviewed family surrogates in our hospital to explore target user group\'s decision-making experience and identify their unmet needs; (iii) evidence syntheses: integrate latest clinical evidence and pertinent information to inform the content development of DA. Results The competitive analysis included 16 relevant DAs, from which we derived valuable insights using existing resources. User decision needs were explored among a cohort of 15 family surrogates, revealing four thematic issues in decision-making, including stuck into dilemmas, sense of uncertainty, limited capacity, and delayed decision confirmation. A total of 27 articles were included for evidence syntheses. Relevant decision-making knowledge on disease and treatment, as delineated in the literature sourced from decision support system or clinical guidelines, were formatted as the foundational knowledge base. Twenty-one items of evidence were extracted and integrated into the content panels of benefits and risks of RRT, possible outcomes, and reasons to choose. The DA was drafted into a web-based phototype using the elements of UCD. This platform could guide users in their preparation of decision-making through a sequential four-step process: identifying treatment options, weighing the benefits and risks, clarifying personal preferences and values, and formulating a schedule for formal shared decision-making with clinicians. Conclusions We developed a rapid prototype of DA tailored for family surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients in need of RRT in ICU setting. Future studies are needed to evaluate its usability, feasibility, and clinical effects of this intervention.

BACKGROUND: The Good Practice Guidelines for health information, Good Health Information Austria and Guideline Evidence-based Health Information are established resources for developing evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions. The aim of this project was to capture challenges in applying these standards in practice, identify gaps and development needs and gain insights for their further development.
METHODS: In December 2020, members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine were invited to share their experiences and needs in applying German standards for evidence-based health information through an online survey focussing on open questions (part 1: needs assessment). The feedback was analysed using qualitative content analysis and presented in a workshop at the EbM Congress 2021 with the goal of specifying the feedback from the needs assessment and discussing ideas for the further development of the standards (part 2: specification). In the final step, a second survey was conducted in February 2023 to prioritize the identified topics by the working group members (part 3: prioritization). The results were analysed descriptively.
RESULTS: Among the 41 participants, only 23% considered the standards to be sufficient, and only 55% found their application in the development of information to be easy or rather easy. The needs assessment and workshop (n=46) helped to identify various areas of action. With regard to the application of the standards, the following challenges were identified: lack of user orientation, content gaps, methods and risk communication. Gaps in the standards were identified regarding formats, content, and the connection to healthcare provision. For the advancement of the standards ideas for additional content, stakeholder involvement, and improvement of the usability of the standards were identified. In the prioritization survey, the topic areas, \"presenting benefits and harms\" and \"content beyond treatments (in particular, diagnostics and prognosis)\" were considered to be the most important (n=36).
CONCLUSIONS: Among members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine, a high demand has been identified for the further development of standards for creating evidence-based health information. In addition to content development, the integration of existing documents and tools should also be considered, including products issued by other institutions. The success of advancing the standards also depends on improving their applicability - for example through an attractive online platform. The results are limited by the sample which only included members of the EbM Network\'s patient information and participation working group and a limited response rate.
CONCLUSIONS: The needs assessment showed that the currently established standards and recommendations for the development of evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions represent important cornerstones but need to be expanded to answer more practice-oriented questions. The challenges and proposed solutions stated by the participants can help further develop the standards. The prioritization can be used to set priorities for the development of the standards, guide the order of possible work packages and allocate resources.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning is a process through which people communicate their goals and preferences for future medical care. Due to the complexity of the decision-making process, decision aids can assist individuals in balancing potential benefits and risks of treatment options.
OBJECTIVE: While decision aids have the potential to better promote advance care planning, their characteristics, content and application effectiveness are unclear and lack systematic review. Therefore, we aimed to explore these three aspects and establish a foundation for future research.
METHODS: Scoping review.
METHODS: This scoping review adheres to the framework proposed by Arksey and O\'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR list. Six English-language databases were systematically searched from the time of construction until 1 December 2023. Two researchers conducted the article screening and data extraction, and the extracted data was presented in written tables and narrative summaries.
RESULTS: Of the 1479 titles and abstracts, 20 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Types of decision aids were employed, mainly websites and videos. Decision aid\'s primary components center around 11 areas, such as furnishing information, exploring treatment and care preferences. The main manifestations were a significant increase in knowledge and improved recognition of patients\' target value preferences. Among the aids, websites and videos for advance care planning have relatively high content acceptability and decision-making process satisfaction, but their feasibility has yet to be tested.
CONCLUSIONS: Decision aids were varied, with content focused on describing key information and exploring treatment and care preferences. Regarding application effects, the aids successfully facilitated the advance care planning process and improved the quality of participants\' decisions. Overall, decision aids are efficient in improving the decision-making process for implementing advance care planning in cancer and geriatric populations. In the future, personalised decision aids should be developed based on continuous optimization of tools\' quality and promoted for clinical application.
UNASSIGNED: The paper has adhered to the EQUATOR guidelines and referenced the PRISMAg-ScR checklist.
UNASSIGNED: This is a review without patient and public contribution.
BACKGROUND: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YPHKF, Open Science DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/YPHKF.