Meeting report
How can continuing professional development better promote shared decision-making? Perspectives from an international collaboration
1 Research Center of Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Hospital St-François D'Assise, Québec City, Québec, Canada
2 Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
3 Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
4 School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
5 Continuing Professional Development Office, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada
6 Institute for Applied Health Research, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
7 Department of Community Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
8 Centre for Action in Work Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation, School of Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke, Longueuil, Québec, Canada
9 Lyon 1 University, GATE-LSE (UMR 5824 CNRS), Lyon, France
10 Health Sciences Research Institute, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
11 Institute and Policlinic for Medical Psychology, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
12 Practice Enhancement Division, Collège des médecins du Québec, Montreal, Québec, Canada
13 Institute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
14 Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI), Bloomington, MN, USA
15 Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
16 Continuing Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
17 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
Implementation Science 2011, 6:68 doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-68
Published: 5 July 2011Abstract
Background
Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in healthcare. We aimed to set a research agenda about promoting shared decision-making through continuing professional development.
Methods
Thirty-six participants met for two days.
Results
Participants suggested ways to improve an environmental scan that had inventoried 53 shared decision-making training programs from 14 countries. Their proposed research agenda included reaching an international consensus on shared decision-making competencies and creating a framework for accrediting continuing professional development initiatives in shared decision-making.
Conclusions
Variability in shared decision-making training programs showcases the need for quality assurance frameworks.
