Integrating Shared Decision Making and Decision Support Tools into Clinical Practice Guidelines: What Does It Take? A Qualitative Study

Lena Fischer, Rahel Wollny, Leon V. Schewe, Fülöp Scheibler, Torsten Karge, Thomas Langer, Corinna Schaefer, Ivan D. Florez, Andrew Hutchinson, Sheyu Li, Marta Maes-Carballo, Zachary Munn, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez, Livia Puljak, Anne Stiggelbout and Dawid Pieper
Additional contact information
Lena Fischer: Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany
Rahel Wollny: Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany
Leon V. Schewe: SHARE TO CARE, Patient-Centered Care GmbH, Cologne, Germany
Fülöp Scheibler: SHARE TO CARE, Patient-Centered Care GmbH, Cologne, Germany
Torsten Karge: CGS Clinical Guideline Services GmbH, Kiel, Germany
Thomas Langer: German Network for Evidence-Based Medicine, Berlin, Germany
Corinna Schaefer: German Health Literacy Network, Cologne, Germany
Ivan D. Florez: Department of Pediatrics, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia
Andrew Hutchinson: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Manchester, UK
Sheyu Li: Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Cochrane China Centre, MAGIC China Centre, Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
Marta Maes-Carballo: General Surgery Department, Hospital Público de Verín, Ourense, Spain
Zachary Munn: Health Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez: Evaluation Unit (SESCS), Canary Islands Health Service (SCS), Tenerife, Spain
Livia Puljak: Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Healthcare, Catholic University of Croatia, Zagreb, Croatia
Anne Stiggelbout: Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
Dawid Pieper: Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany

Medical Decision Making, 2026, vol. 46, issue 1, 60-75

Abstract: Background. Awareness of shared decision making (SDM) is growing, but its integration into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) remains challenging. We sought expert insights to identify strategies for more successfully integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs. Specifically, our objectives were to determine 1) how to identify CPG recommendations where SDM is most relevant and 2) what factors in CPG development hinder or facilitate the consideration of SDM and the development of decision support tools. Methods . We conducted semi-structured interviews with experts on CPGs and SDM. We analyzed the data using Mayring’s qualitative content analysis. Results. The 16 interviewed participants proposed several determinants of and strategies for identifying SDM-relevant recommendations. The most frequently mentioned determinant was “multiple options with benefits and harms where choices depend on individual preferences.†The most frequently mentioned strategy was prioritization, similar to the CPG scoping phase. Participants highlighted the role of patient partners in facilitating the consideration of SDM in CPG development but noted that a supportive culture toward both patient and public involvement and SDM is needed. The absence of standardized methods and inadequate resources hinder the consideration of SDM and the combined development of CPGs and decision support tools. The current format of CPGs was deemed overwhelming, while the inclusion of choice awareness in CPG recommendations could facilitate SDM. Conclusions. The identified strategies provide a starting point for CPG organizations to explore ways for integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs while considering context-specific barriers and facilitators. Implications. Further research is needed to assess the usefulness and feasibility of the proposed strategies. New policies and stronger collaboration between CPG and SDM communities appear to be needed to address identified barriers. Highlights We explored expert knowledge and experience on how to successfully integrate shared decision making (SDM) and decision support tools into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). A combined development of CPGs and decision support tools was deemed essential; however, development processes often remain separate, with the CPG development group unaware of the decision support tool development group, and vice versa. In addition to stating choice awareness in CPGs, participants highlighted the critical role of patient partners in considering SDM in CPG development, but resource issues and a culture that neglects patient involvement and SDM remain. For CPG development groups to consider SDM and for health care professionals to practice it, things need to be as easy as possible.

Keywords: Shared decision-making; clinical practice guidelines; decision support tools; patient decision aids; qualitative study (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X251368866 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:46:y:2026:i:1:p:60-75

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X251368866

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().