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 |