Assessing decision-making in education of restorative and prosthetic dentistry: a pilot study

AbstractBackgroundWhile international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MyComrade (MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically-informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. Our aim in this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of a trial of the intervention with unique modifications accounting for contextual variations in two neighbouring health systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)).MethodsA pilot cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted, using a mixed methods process evaluation to investigate the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention. A total of 16 practices will be recruited (eight in ROI; eight in NI) and four practices in each jurisdiction will be randomly allocated to intervention or control. Twenty people living with multimorbidity and prescribed ≥10 repeat medications will be recruited from each practice prior to practice randomisation. In intervention practices, the MyComrade intervention will be delivered by pairs of GPs in ROI, and a GP and Practice Based Pharmacist (PBP) in NI. The GPs/GP and PBP will schedule time to review medications together using a checklist. Usual care will proceed in practices in the control arm. Data will be collected via electronic health records and postal questionnaires at recruitment, and 4- and 8-months after randomisation. Qualitative interviews to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and explore experiences related to multimorbidity management will be conducted with a purposive sample of GPs, PBPs, practice administration staff and patients in intervention and control practices. The feasibility of conducting a health economic evaluation as part of a future definitive trial will be assessed.DiscussionThe findings of this pilot study will assess the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention in two different health systems. Evaluation of the progression criteria will guide the decision to progress to a definitive trial and inform trial design. The findings will also contribute to the growing evidence-base related to intervention development and feasibility studies.Trial registrationRegistry: ISRCTN, ISRCTN80017020; Date of confirmation 4/11/2019; Retrospectively registered; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80017020.

Download Full-text

The decision-making processes of pharmacists in inland Australia - a pilot study

Rural and Remote Health ◽

10.22605/rrh1573 ◽

2011 ◽

Author(s):

Mary Madden ◽

Patrick Ball

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Decision Making Processes

Download Full-text

Desirable features in a decision aid for prenatal screening – what do pregnant women and their partners think? A mixed methods pilot study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-26021/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Titilayo Tatiana Agbadje ◽

Samira Abbasgholizadeh Rahimi ◽

Mélissa Côté ◽

Andrée-Anne Tremblay ◽

Mariama Penda Diallo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Down Syndrome ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Pregnant Women ◽

Technology Acceptance ◽

Decision Aid ◽

Prenatal Screening ◽

Values Clarification ◽

Quebec City

Abstract Background To help pregnant women and their partners make informed value-congruent decisions about Down syndrome prenatal screening, our team developed two successive versions of a decision aid (DAv2017 and DAv2014). We aimed to assess pregnant women and their partners’ perceptions of the usefulness of the two DAs for preparing for decision making, their relative acceptability and their most desirable features. Methods This is a mixed methods pilot study. We recruited participants of study (women and their partners) when consulting for prenatal care in three clinical sites in Quebec City. To be eligible, women had to: (a) be at least 18 years old; (b) be more than 16 weeks pregnant; or having given birth in the previous year and (c) be able to speak and write in French or English. Both women and partners were invited to give their informed consent. We collected quantitative data on the usefulness of the DAs for preparing for decision making and their relative acceptability. We developed an interview grid based on the Technology Acceptance Model and Acceptability questionnaire to explore their perceptions of the most desirable features. We performed descriptive statistics and deductive analysis. Results Overall, 23 couples and 16 individual women participated in the study. The majority of participants were between 25 and 34 years old (79% of women and 59% of partners) and highly educated (66.7% of women and 54% of partners had a university-level education). DAv2017 scored higher for usefulness for preparing for decision making (86.2 ± 13 out of 100 for DAv2017 and 77.7 ± 14 for DAv2014). For most dimensions, DAv2017 was more acceptable than DAv2014 (e.g. the amount of information was found “just right” by 80% of participants for DAv2017 against 56% for DAv2014). However, participants preferred the presentation and the values clarification exercise of DAv2014. In their opinion, neither DA presented information in a completely balanced manner. They suggested adding more information about raising Down syndrome children, replacing frequencies with percentages, different values clarification methods, and a section for the partner. Conclusions A new user-centered version of the prenatal screening DA will integrate participants’ suggestions to reflect end users’ priorities.

Download Full-text

Autonomic Arousal during Group Decision Making Consensus Rules versus Majority Rules: Pilot Study

Communications in Computer and Information Science - ENTERprise Information Systems ◽

10.1007/978-3-642-24355-4_26 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 260-269 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Alana Enslein ◽

Chelsea Hodges ◽

Kelsey Zuchegno ◽

Tadd Patton ◽

Reeves Robert ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Group Decision Making ◽

Group Decision ◽

Autonomic Arousal ◽

Majority Rules

Download Full-text

A Study of Organizational Narrative Simulation for Decision Support

Multidisciplinary Studies in Knowledge and Systems Science ◽

10.4018/978-1-4666-3998-0.ch013 ◽

2013 ◽

pp. 179-192

Author(s):

C. L. Yeung ◽

C. F. Cheung ◽

W. M. Wang ◽

E. Tsui

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Decision Support ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Reference Site ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Implementation Processes ◽

Organizational Narrative ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

New Challenges ◽

Narrative Simulation

This paper presents an overview of current decision making approaches. For some approaches abstract information is provided, whereas others require a large amount of labor and time resources to facilitate decision making. However, few address the issues of assisting participants in learning how to make decisions and provide prompt responses to the situations. Harnessing lessons learned from making inappropriate decisions is expensive. To redress this problem, this paper presents a pilot study of the investigation of the psychological behaviors of humans to improve decision making processes with the use of organizational narrative simulation (ONS). By using the ONS method, possible and plausible narrative-based environments can be simulated. Participants can take actions based on their decisions; they can also observe the changes and the consequences. The decisions for handling new challenges generated purposely are validated in a trial that allows prompt responses to the situations. The ONS method is implemented in a selected reference site. The implementation processes, findings, and benefits are presented.

Download Full-text