TY - JOUR
T1 - Supported decision making: a review of the international literature
AU - Davidson, Gavin
AU - Kelly, Berni
AU - Macdonald, Geraldine
AU - Rizzo, Maria
AU - Lombard, Louise
AU - Abogunrin, Oluwaseye
AU - Clift-Matthews, Victoria
AU - Martin, Alison
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Supported decision making (SDM) refers to the process of supporting people, whose decision making ability may be impaired, to make decisions and so promote autonomy and prevent the need for substitute decision making. There have been developments in SDM but mainly in the areas of intellectual disabilities and end-of-life care rather than in mental health. The main aim of this review was to provide an overview of the available evidence relevant to SDM and so facilitate discussion of how this aspect of law, policy and practice may be further developed in mental health services. The method used for this review was a Rapid Evidence Assessment which involved: developing appropriate search strategies; searching relevant databases and grey literature; then assessing, including and reviewing relevant studies. Included studies were grouped into four main themes: studies reporting stakeholders’ views on SDM; studies identifying barriers to the implementation of SDM; studies highlighting ways to improve implementation; and studies on the impact of SDM. The available evidence on implementation and impact, identified by this review, is limited but there are important rights-based, effectiveness and pragmatic arguments for further developing and researching SDM for people with mental health problems.
AB - Supported decision making (SDM) refers to the process of supporting people, whose decision making ability may be impaired, to make decisions and so promote autonomy and prevent the need for substitute decision making. There have been developments in SDM but mainly in the areas of intellectual disabilities and end-of-life care rather than in mental health. The main aim of this review was to provide an overview of the available evidence relevant to SDM and so facilitate discussion of how this aspect of law, policy and practice may be further developed in mental health services. The method used for this review was a Rapid Evidence Assessment which involved: developing appropriate search strategies; searching relevant databases and grey literature; then assessing, including and reviewing relevant studies. Included studies were grouped into four main themes: studies reporting stakeholders’ views on SDM; studies identifying barriers to the implementation of SDM; studies highlighting ways to improve implementation; and studies on the impact of SDM. The available evidence on implementation and impact, identified by this review, is limited but there are important rights-based, effectiveness and pragmatic arguments for further developing and researching SDM for people with mental health problems.
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.01.008
DO - 10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.01.008
M3 - Article
SN - 0160-2527
VL - 38
SP - 61
EP - 67
JO - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
JF - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
ER -