4.6 Article

The Relationship Between Decisional Regret and Well-Being in Patients With and Without Depressive Disorders: Mediating Role of Shared Decision-Making

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.657224

Keywords

decisional regret; subjective well-being; depression; shared decision-making; mediation analysis

Categories

Funding

  1. Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation [2021A1515011973]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that shared decision-making can reduce patients' decisional regret and improve their well-being, especially for non-depressive patients. The results suggest the importance of considering depressive status as part of routine healthcare in order to enhance patient outcomes.
Background: The objectives of this study were two-fold: (1) to assess the relationship between patients' decisional regret and their well-being and (2) to examine the mediated effect of shared decision-making (SDM) on this relationship. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in five cities in Southern China. Patients were asked to fill out questionnaires assessing their decisional regret, SDM, subjective well-being, and depressive status. Mediation analysis was used to investigate the effect of SDM on the relationship between patients' decisional regret and their subjective well-being. Results: The findings showed significant direct negative effects of decisional regret on subjective well-being and SDM. For non-depressive patients, SDM exerted a significant and indirect effect on reducing the negative influence of decisional regret on subjective well-being. Conclusions: Findings suggest that implementation of SDM can decrease patients' decisional regret and improve their well-being; however, there is a need to examine their depressive status as part of routine healthcare.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available