0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessShared decision making (SDM) has been advocated to improve patient care, patient decision acceptance, patient-provider communication, patient motivation, adherence, and patient reported outcomes. Documentation of SDM is endorsed in several society guidelines and is a condition of reimbursement for selected cardiovascular and cardiac arrhythmia procedures. However, many clinicians argue that SDM already occurs with clinical encounter discussions or the process of obtaining informed consent and note the additional imposed workload of using and documenting decision aids without validated tools or evidence that they improve clinical outcomes. In reality, SDM is a process and can be done without decision tools, although the process may be variable. Also, SDM advocates counter that the low-risk process of SDM need not be held to the high bar of demonstrating clinical benefit and that increasing the quality of decision making should be sufficient. Our review leverages a multidisciplinary group of experts in cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, epidemiology, and SDM, as well as a patient advocate. Our goal is to examine and assess SDM methodology, tools, and available evidence on outcomes in patients with heart rhythm disorders to help determine the value of SDM, assess its possible impact on electrophysiological procedures and cardiac arrhythmia management, better inform regulatory requirements, and identify gaps in knowledge and future needs.
Mina K. Chung, Angela Fagerlin, Paul J. Wang, Tinuola B. Ajayi, Larry A. Allen, Tina Baykaner, Emelia Benjamin, Megan E. Branda, Kerri L. Cavanaugh, Lin Y. Chen, George H. Crossley, Rebecca K. Delaney, Lee L. Eckhardt, Kathleen L. Grady, Ian Hargraves, Mellanie True Hills, Matthew M. Kalscheur, Daniel B. Kramer, Marleen Kunneman, Rachel Lampert, Aisha T. Langford, Krystina B. Lewis, Ying Lü, John Mandrola, Kathryn A. Martinez, Daniel D. Matlock, Sarah McCarthy, Víctor M. Montori, Peter A. Noseworthy, Kate M. Orland, Elissa M. Ozanne, Rod Passman, Krishna Pundi, Dan M. Roden, Elizabeth V. Saarel, Monika M. Schmidt, Samuel F. Sears, Dawn Stacey, Randall S. Stafford, Benjamin A. Steinberg, Sojin Y. Wass, Jennifer M. Wright (2021). Shared Decision Making in Cardiac Electrophysiology Procedures and Arrhythmia Management. , 14(12), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.121.007958.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2021
Authors
42
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
en
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.121.007958
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access