Skip to main content

Table 2 Overview of the retained papers

From: The role of emotion in clinical decision making: an integrative literature review

First author, year Country Study design Participant type (e.g., nurses) and number Explicit CDM Model Explicit Emotion/EI Model Aspect/s of Decision making investigated
Alba, 2016 [67] USA Quantitative: correlational Nurses (n = 182) No No Ethical DM/intuition
Alexander et al., 2014 [68] USA Quantitative: descriptive Physicians; Nurses (n = 71) No No Evidence of Palliative Care providers’ compassionate response to patient emotional distress
Arevalo et al., 2013 [69] Netherlands Quantitative: cross-sectional Nurses (n = 277) No No Nursing role in end of life CDM
Bach et al., 2009 [49] Canada Qualitative: grounded theory Nurses (n = 14) No No Nursing role in end of life CDM
Bryon et al., 2012 [50] Belgium Qualitative: grounded theory Nurses (n = 21) No No Nurses’ CDM in relation to artificial nutrition or hydration for patients with dementia
Calvin et al., 2007 [51] USA Qualitative: Descriptive Nurses (n = 12) No No CDM during change of intensity of care/ end of life care
Chaffey et al., 2010 [52] Australia Qualitative: grounded theory Occupational Therapists (n = 9) Yes No Understanding and use of intuition in mental health practice
Courtenay et al., 2009 [71] England Mixed methods Nurse prescribers (n = 40) No No Communication; awareness of patient emotion in decision making
Gallagher et al., 2015 [53] Brazil, UK, Germany, Ireland and Palestine Qualitative: grounded theory ICU nurses (n = 51) No No ICU nurses’ end of life CDM practices in different cultural contexts
Harun et al., 2015 [54] UK Qualitative: thematic analysis Dermatologists (n = 40) No No Clinical and non-clinical influences on discharge decision making
Hov et al., 2009 [55] Denmark Qualitative: Phenomenology Nurses (n = 14) No No end of life CDM
Islam et al., 2015 [56] USA Qualitative: cognitive task analysis Expert infectious disease physicians (n = 10) Yes (proposed) No Cognitive mechanisms and complexity
Kim et al., 2016 [57] Korea Qualitative: content analysis Nurses (n = 32) No No Residential care CDM to preserve abilities in functional decline
Lafrance Robinson et al., 2015 [70] Canada Quantitative: cross-sectional survey Clinicians from various disciplines (n = 305) No Iatragenic Maintenance Model & Therapist Drift Model Negative influence of own and colleague’s emotions on CDM
McAndrew et al., 2015 [58] USA Qualitative: grounded theory Nurses; Physicians (n = 7; 4) No No end of life care
McBee et al., 2015 [59] USA (army) Mixed methods: experimental (IVs) and constant comparative approach Physicians (n = 10) Situated cognition No Effect of contextual factors on CDM
McLemore et al., 2015 [60] USA Qualitative: thematic analysis Nurses (n = 25) No No Abortion-related care, ethical CDM
Novick et al., 2015 [61] Canada Qualitative: constructivist grounded theory Surgeons (n = 14) No No Decision to call for expert assistance
Smith et al., 2010 [62] Australia Qualitative: hermeneutics Physiotherapists (n = 14) No No Effect of clinician experience on CDM in respiratory care
Stolper et al., 2009 [63] Netherlands Focus groups GPs (n = 28) Yes (proposed) No ‘Gut feelings’ in diagnostic/prognostic processes
Stolper et al. B, 2009 [64] Netherlands Delphi consensus GPs (n = 27) No No Gathering consensus on ‘gut feelings’ in CDM
Tallentire et al., 2011 [65] UK Qualitative: grounded theory Junior physicians (n = 36) No No Factors affecting behaviour of newly qualified doctors
Tentler et al., 2008 [66] USA Qualitative: focus groups/RCT Primary care physicians (n = 22) No No doctors prescribing behaviours in response to patients’ requests for anti-depressants