Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 230

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patientsʼ Perceptions of Sharing in Decisions: A Systematic Review of Interventions to Enhance Shared Decision Making in Routine Clinical Practice

Légaré, France, Turcotte, Stéphane, Stacey, Dawn, Ratté, Stéphane, Kryworuchko, Jennifer, Graham, Ian D.·2012·The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

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 · 10.2165/11592180-000000000-00000

Cites

10 of 10 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

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

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 230

Metadata

Authors
Légaré, F., Turcotte, S., Stacey, D., Ratté, S., Kryworuchko, J., & Graham, I. D.
Venue
The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Published
2012-03
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
1-19
ISSN
1178-1653 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W22570924
Cited by
230
References
10
FWCI
51.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patientsʼ Perceptions of Sharing in Decisions: A Systematic Review of Interventions to Enhance Shared Decision Making in Routine Clinical Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2165/11592180-000000000-00000
The paper
Légaré, F., Turcotte, S., Stacey, D., Ratté, S., Kryworuchko, J., & Graham, I. D. (2012). Patientsʼ Perceptions of Sharing in Decisions: A Systematic Review of Interventions to Enhance Shared Decision Making in Routine Clinical Practice. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. https://doi.org/10.2165/11592180-000000000-00000

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.