scholarly journals Cancer-Related Internet Use and Its Association With Patient Decision Making and Trust in Physicians Among Patients in an Early Drug Development Clinic: A Questionnaire-Based Cross-Sectional Observational Study

10.2196/10348 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. e10348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Goldy C George ◽  
Eucharia C Iwuanyanwu ◽  
Adrianna S Buford ◽  
Sarina A Piha-Paul ◽  
Vivek Subbiah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Drug Development ◽  
Internet Use ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Trust In Physicians ◽  
Early Drug

scholarly journals A Typology of Patients Based on Decision-Making Styles: Cross-Sectional Survey Study (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Anne FitzPatrick ◽  
Alexandra Claudia Hess ◽  
Lynn Sudbury-Riley ◽  
Peter Johannes Schulz
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Online Health Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Practitioners ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Decision Making Styles

BACKGROUND Although previous research shows broad differences in the impact of online health information on patient-practitioner decision making, specific research is required to identify and conceptualize patient decision-making styles related to the use of online health information and to differentiate segments according to the influence of online information on patient decision making and interactions with health professionals. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate patients’ decision making in relation to online health information and interactions with health care practitioners. We also aimed to present a typology of patients based on significant differences in their decision making. METHODS We applied a large-scale cross-sectional research design using a survey. Data, generated using a questionnaire that was administered by companies specializing in providing online panels, were collected from random samples of baby boomers in the United Kingdom, the United States, and New Zealand. The total sample comprised 996 baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964, who had used the internet in the previous 6 months to search for and share health-related information. Data were analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, as well as one-way analysis of variance, chi-square tests, and paired sample <italic>t</italic> tests. RESULTS Analyses identified 3 key decision-making styles that served as the base for 4 unique and stable segments of patients with distinctive decision-making styles: the Collaborators (229/996, 23.0%), the Autonomous-Collaborators (385/996, 38.7%), the Assertive-Collaborators (111/996, 11.1%), and the Passives (271/996, 27.2%). Profiles were further developed for these segments according to key differences in the online health information behavior, demographics, and interactional behaviors of patients. The typology demonstrates that collaborative decision making is dominant among patients either in its pure form or in combination with autonomous or assertive decision making. In other words, most patients (725/996, 72.8%) show significant collaboration in their decision making with health care professionals. However, at times, patients in the combination Autonomous-Collaborative segment prefer to exercise individual autonomy in their decision making, and those in the combination Assertive-Collaborative segment prefer to be assertive with health professionals. Finally, this study shows that a substantial number of patients adopt a distinctly passive decision-making style (271/996, 27.2%). CONCLUSIONS The patient typology provides a framework for distinguishing practice-relevant and addressable segments with important implications for health care practitioners, including better-targeted communication programs for patients and more successful outcomes for health care services in the long term.

scholarly journals A Typology of Patients Based on Decision-Making Styles: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

10.2196/15332 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. e15332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Anne FitzPatrick ◽  
Alexandra Claudia Hess ◽  
Lynn Sudbury-Riley ◽  
Peter Johannes Schulz
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Online Health Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Practitioners ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Decision Making Styles

Background Although previous research shows broad differences in the impact of online health information on patient-practitioner decision making, specific research is required to identify and conceptualize patient decision-making styles related to the use of online health information and to differentiate segments according to the influence of online information on patient decision making and interactions with health professionals. Objective This study aimed to investigate patients’ decision making in relation to online health information and interactions with health care practitioners. We also aimed to present a typology of patients based on significant differences in their decision making. Methods We applied a large-scale cross-sectional research design using a survey. Data, generated using a questionnaire that was administered by companies specializing in providing online panels, were collected from random samples of baby boomers in the United Kingdom, the United States, and New Zealand. The total sample comprised 996 baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964, who had used the internet in the previous 6 months to search for and share health-related information. Data were analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, as well as one-way analysis of variance, chi-square tests, and paired sample t tests. Results Analyses identified 3 key decision-making styles that served as the base for 4 unique and stable segments of patients with distinctive decision-making styles: the Collaborators (229/996, 23.0%), the Autonomous-Collaborators (385/996, 38.7%), the Assertive-Collaborators (111/996, 11.1%), and the Passives (271/996, 27.2%). Profiles were further developed for these segments according to key differences in the online health information behavior, demographics, and interactional behaviors of patients. The typology demonstrates that collaborative decision making is dominant among patients either in its pure form or in combination with autonomous or assertive decision making. In other words, most patients (725/996, 72.8%) show significant collaboration in their decision making with health care professionals. However, at times, patients in the combination Autonomous-Collaborative segment prefer to exercise individual autonomy in their decision making, and those in the combination Assertive-Collaborative segment prefer to be assertive with health professionals. Finally, this study shows that a substantial number of patients adopt a distinctly passive decision-making style (271/996, 27.2%). Conclusions The patient typology provides a framework for distinguishing practice-relevant and addressable segments with important implications for health care practitioners, including better-targeted communication programs for patients and more successful outcomes for health care services in the long term.

An economic theory of patient decision-making

2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas O. Stewart ◽  
Joseph P. DeMarco
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Economic Theory ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision

Views of Psychologists About Their Role in Hastened Death

2021 ◽  
pp. 003022282110451
Author(s):  
Sílvia Marina ◽  
Tony Wainwright ◽  
Miguel Ricou
Keyword(s):  
Terminal Illness ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Practice ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Life Issues ◽  
Hastened Death ◽  
End Of Life Issues

Hastened death practices are legal in several countries. Psychologists are increasingly taking a more active role in end-of-life issues, but the role of psychologists in requests to hasten death is not established. This study aims to contribute guidance for psychological practice in the context of requests to hasten death. We conducted a cross-sectional and cross-cultural study with Psychologists from Portugal and Luxembourg who answer closed and open questions to provide views about their role in hastened death. Psychological assessment, psychological support to patient and family, the exploration of patient decision-making and reorientation of patients were viewed as roles for psychologists. However, these roles may differ depending whether the patient has a terminal or non-terminal illness.

scholarly journals 181. I FOUND IT MOST CONFUSING, I DIDN’T KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE: EXPLORING PATIENT DECISION MAKING AROUND GOUT AND DIET

Rheumatology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 56 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Liddle ◽  
Jane C. Richardson ◽  
Christian D. Mallen ◽  
Samantha L. Hider ◽  
Priyanka Chandratre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document