Cited by 35Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcarePatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareDiabetes Management and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study

Open access
Feenstra, Bryan, Lawson, Margaret L, Harrison, Denise, Boland, Laura, Stacey, Dawn·2015·BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although children can benefit from being included in health decisions, little is known about effective interventions to support their involvement. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of decision coaching guided by the Ottawa Family Decision Guide with children and parents considering insulin delivery options for type 1 diabetes (insulin pump, multiple daily injections, or standard insulin injections). METHODS: Pre-/post-test field testing design. Eligible participants were children (≤18 years) with type 1 diabetes and their parents attending an ambulatory diabetes clinic in a tertiary children's hospital. Parent-child dyads received decision coaching using the Ottawa Family Decision Guide that was pre-populated with evidence on insulin delivery options, benefits, and harms. Primary outcomes were feasibility of recruitment and data collection, and parent and child acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 16 families invited to participate, 12 agreed and 7 attended the decision coaching session. For the five missed families, two families were unable to attend the session or the decision coach was not available (N=3). Baseline and immediately post-coaching questionnaires were all completed and follow-up questionnaires two weeks post-coaching were missing from one parent-child dyad. Missing questionnaire items were 5 of 340 items for children (1.5%) and 1 of 429 for parents (0.2%). Decision coaching was rated as acceptable with higher scores from parents and their children who were in earlier stages of decision making. CONCLUSION: Decision coaching with children and their parents considering insulin options was feasible implement and evaluate in our diabetes clinic and was acceptable to participants. Recruitment was difficult due to scheduling restrictions related to the timing of the study. Coaching should target participants earlier in the decision making process and be scheduled at times that are convenient for families and coaches. Findings were used to inform a full-scale evaluation that is currently underway.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12911-014-0126-2

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Committee cDACPGE. Canadian diabetes association 2008 clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diab. 2008;32:S1–201.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Feenstra, B., Lawson, M. L., Harrison, D., Boland, L., & Stacey, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CA)
Corresponding author
Stacey, Dawn
Venue
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published
2015-02-07
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
5-5
ISSN
1472-6947 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2118637828
Cited by
35
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • uO Research (University of Ottawa) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
decision coaching, type 1 diabetes, shared decision-making, children and adolescents, parents, parent-child dyads, feasibility, acceptability, insulin pump, multiple daily insulin injections, evidence-based decision support
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Decision Making, Decision Support Techniques, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Family, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care

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