Cited by 167Media Influence and HealthPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

All Stories Are Not Alike: A Purpose-, Content-, and Valence-Based Taxonomy of Patient Narratives in Decision Aids

Shaffer, Victoria A., Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J.·2013·Medical Decision Making

Abstract

The use of patient stories in decision aids is a highly controversial practice. However, the resulting debates and research have yielded little consensus about the impact of patient stories due to vague operational definitions of narratives. In this article, we argue that narratives are not homogeneous in either content or effect and hence should not be considered a single construct in research. The purpose of this article is to provide a taxonomy that guides both the development of decision aids and future research on this topic. We define three dimensions of narratives that are likely to moderate their impact on decision making: 1) the purpose of the narrative, 2) the content of the message, and 3) the evaluative valence, or overall tone, of the message. In addition, we describe predicted effects of different types of narratives on decision making and discuss their potential interactions. Our taxonomy provides a framework that will allow for the precise documentation of different narrative types, the use of appropriate outcome measures, and a systematic evaluation of narratives in all types of decision aids. Failures to recognize the complex structure of narratives will result both in research that does little to inform our understanding of the impact of patient stories and in the use of narratives in patient education materials that have unintended consequences on both decision processes and behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0272989x12463266

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shaffer, V. A., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Department of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, and Department of Psychological Sciences, College of Arts and Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri (VAS)
Venue
Medical Decision Making
Published
2012-10-11
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
4-13
ISSN
  • 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-681X
OpenAlex
W2025581057
Cited by
167
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8
FWCI
142.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
patient narratives, decision aids, narrative, narrative purpose, message content, decision-making, patient education materials, shared decision-making
MeSH terms
Decision Support Techniques, Humans, Patients, Narration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review