Holly O. Witteman|Kristin G. Maki|Gratianne Vaisson|Jeanette Finderup|Krystina B. Lewis|Karina Dahl Steffensen|Caroline Beaudoin|Sandrine Comeau|Robert J. Volk
Systematic Development of Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the IPDAS Collaboration
Université Laval|Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec|The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center|Université Laval|Aarhus University Hospital|University of Ottawa|Lillebaelt Hospital|Université Laval|Université Laval|The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
2013 update evidence informing quality dimensions behind international patient decision aid standards ipdas offered model process developers patient decision aidsto summarize update evidence used inform systematic development patient decision aids ipdas collaborationto provide details design development methods summarized findings subgroup n 283 patient decision aid projects recent systematic review user involvement vaisson et al using new measure usercenteredness ucd11 rated degree usercenteredness reported 66 articles describing patient decision aid development citing 2013 ipdas update systematic development contacted 66 articles authors request selfreports ucd11 itemsthe 283 development processes varied substantially minimal iteration cycles complex processes multiple iterations needs assessments extensive involvement end users summarized minimal medium maximal processes data authors 54 66 articles 82 provided selfreported ucd11 ratings selfreported scores significantly higher reviewer ratings reviewers mean sd 645 310 authors mean sd 962 116 p 0001decision aid developers embraced principles usercentered design development patient decision aids also underreporting aspects user involvement publications tools templates may reduce need extensive development new approaches rapid development aids proposed detailed approach feasible provide empirically derived benchmark processes reporting checklist support developers fully describing development processesbox see text