This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Athale A, Giguere A, Barbara A, Krassova S, Iorio A. Developing a two-sided intervention to facilitate shared decision-making in haemophilia: decision boxes for clinicians and patient decision aids for patients. Haemophilia. 2014 Nov;20(6):800-6.AthaleAGiguereABarbaraAKrassovaSIorioA.Developing a two-sided intervention to facilitate shared decision-making in haemophilia: decision boxes for clinicians and patient decision aids for patients..2014Nov;20(6):800-6.Search in Google Scholar
Valentino LA, Blanchette V, Negrier C, O’Mahoney B, Vias V, Sannie T, Skinner M. Personalising haemophilia management with shared decision making. J Haem Pract 2021; 8(1) 69-79. doi:10.17225/jhp/00178ValentinoLABlanchetteVNegrierCO’MahoneyBViasVSannieTSkinnerM.Personalising haemophilia management with shared decision making.2021;8(1)69-79. doi:10.17225/jhp/00178Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Bomhof-Roordink H, Gärtner FR, Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AR. Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e031763. doi: 10.1136/bmj.open-2019-031763.Bomhof-RoordinkHGärtnerFRStiggelboutAMPieterseAR.Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review.2019;9:e031763. doi:10.1136/bmj.open-2019-031763.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Légaré F, Härter M, Stiggelbout AM, Thomson R, Stacey D. Choosing treatments and the role of shared decision-making. In: North J, Nolte E, Merkur S, Anell a (eds.), Achieving Person-Centred Health Systems: Evidence, Strategies and Challenges. 2020. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 283-316. doi: 10.1017/9781108855464.014.LégaréFHärterMStiggelboutAMThomsonRStaceyD.Choosing treatments and the role of shared decision-making. In:NorthJNolteEMerkurSAnella(eds.),.2020.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.283-316. doi:10.1017/9781108855464.014.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan A. Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med 1999; 49(5): 651-61. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00145-8.CharlesCGafniAWhelanA.Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model.1999;49(5):651-61. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00145-8.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Shared decision making. NICE guideline [NG197]. Published 17 June 2021. Available from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng197 (accessed July 2023).National Institute for Health and Care Excellence..NICE guideline [NG197].Published 17 June 2021. Available from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng197(accessed July 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Elwyn G, Durand MA, Song J, et al. A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process. BMJ 2017; 359: j4891. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j4891.ElwynGDurandMASongJ.A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process.2017;359:j4891. doi:10.1136/bmj.j4891.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Srivastava A, Santagostino E, Dougall A, et al.; WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia panelists and co-authors. WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia 2020; 26 Suppl 6:1-158. doi: 10.1111/hae.14046.SrivastavaASantagostinoEDougallA.;WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia panelists and co-authors. WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia,3rd edition.2020;26Suppl 6:1-158. doi:10.1111/hae.14046.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mühlbacher AC, Sadler A, Lamprecht B, Juhnke C. Patient preferences in the treatment of hemophilia A: A Best-Worst Scaling Case 3 analysis. Value Health 2020 Jul;23(7):862-869. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.02.013.MühlbacherACSadlerALamprechtBJuhnkeC.Patient preferences in the treatment of hemophilia A: A Best-Worst Scaling Case 3 analysis.2020Jul;23(7):862-869. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2020.02.013.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Coppola A, Franchini M, Pappagallo G, et al. Current choices and management of treatment in persons with severe hemophilia A without inhibitors: a mini-Delphi consensus. J Clin Med 2022; 11(3): 801. doi: 10.3390/jcm11030801.CoppolaAFranchiniMPappagalloG.Current choices and management of treatment in persons with severe hemophilia A without inhibitors: a mini-Delphi consensus.2022;11(3):801. doi:10.3390/jcm11030801.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Fletcher S, Jenner K, Holland M, Khair K. The lived experience of a novel disruptive therapy in a group of men and boys with haemophilia A with inhibitors: Emi & Me. Health Expect 2022; 25(1): 443-454. doi: 10.1111/hex.13404.FletcherSJennerKHollandMKhairK.The lived experience of a novel disruptive therapy in a group of men and boys with haemophilia A with inhibitors: Emi & Me.2022;25(1):443-454. doi:10.1111/hex.13404.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Gualtierotti R, Pasca S, Ciavarella A, et al. Updates on novel non-replacement drugs for hemophilia. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 2022; 15(10): 1183. doi: 10.3390/ph15101183..GualtierottiRPascaSCiavarellaA.Updates on novel non-replacement drugs for hemophilia.2022;15(10):1183. doi:10.3390/ph15101183..Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Gogia P, Tarantino M, Schramm W, Aledort L. New directions to develop therapies for people with hemophilia. Expert Rev Hematol 2023 Mar 8:1-17. doi: 10.1080/17474086.2023.2184341. Epub ahead of print.GogiaPTarantinoMSchrammWAledortL.New directions to develop therapies for people with hemophilia.2023Mar8:1-17. doi:10.1080/17474086.2023.2184341. Epub ahead of print.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hermans C, Noone D, Benson G, et al. Hemophilia treatment in 2021: Choosing the “optimal” treatment using an integrative, patient-oriented approach to shared decision-making between patients and clinicians. Blood Rev 2022; 52: 100890. doi: 10.1016/j.blre.2021.100890.HermansCNooneDBensonG.Hemophilia treatment in 2021: Choosing the “optimal” treatment using an integrative, patient-oriented approach to shared decision-making between patients and clinicians.2022;52:100890. doi:10.1016/j.blre.2021.100890.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Scalone L, Mantovani LG, Borghetti F, Von Mackensen S, Gringeri A. Patients’, physicians’, and pharmacists’ preferences towards coagulation factor concentrates to treat haemophilia with inhibitors: results from the COHIBA Study. Haemophilia 2009; 15(2): 473-86. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2008.01926.x.ScaloneLMantovaniLGBorghettiFVon MackensenSGringeriA.Patients’, physicians’, and pharmacists’ preferences towards coagulation factor concentrates to treat haemophilia with inhibitors: results from the COHIBA Study.2009;15(2):473-86. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2516.2008.01926.x.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Woollard L, Gorman R, Rosenfelt DJ. Addressing patient education priorities in the era of gene therapy for haemophilia: Towards evidence-informed shared decision-making. Haemophilia 2021; 27(2): e302-e304. doi: 10.1111/hae.14214.WoollardLGormanRRosenfeltDJ.Addressing patient education priorities in the era of gene therapy for haemophilia: Towards evidence-informed shared decision-making.2021;27(2):e302-e304. doi:10.1111/hae.14214.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Leebeek FWG, Miesbach W. Gene therapy for hemophilia: a review on clinical benefit, limitations, and remaining issues. Blood. 2021 Sep 16;138(11):923-931LeebeekFWGMiesbachW.Gene therapy for hemophilia: a review on clinical benefit, limitations, and remaining issues..2021Sep16;138(11):923-931Search in Google Scholar
Miesbach W, Foster GR, Peyvandi F. Liver-related aspects of gene therapy for haemophilia: Call to action for collaboration between haematologists and hepatologists. J Hepatol 2023; 78(3): 467-470. doi: 10.1016/jhep.2022.11.014.MiesbachWFosterGRPeyvandiF.Liver-related aspects of gene therapy for haemophilia: Call to action for collaboration between haematologists and hepatologists.2023;78(3):467-470. doi:10.1016/jhep.2022.11.014.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Wang M, Negrier C, Driessler F, Goodman C, Skinner MW. The hemophilia gene therapy patient journey: questions and answers for shared decision-making. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16: 1439-1447. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S355627.WangMNegrierCDriesslerFGoodmanCSkinnerMW.The hemophilia gene therapy patient journey: questions and answers for shared decision-making.2022;16:1439-1447. doi:10.2147/PPA.S355627.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Limjoco J, Calatroni A, Aristizabal P, Thornburg CD. Gene therapy preferences and informed decision-making: Results from a National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research survey. Haemophilia 2023; 29 (1): 51-60. doi: 10.1111/hae.14706.LimjocoJCalatroniAAristizabalPThornburgCD.Gene therapy preferences and informed decision-making: Results from a National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research survey.2023;29(1):51-60. doi:10.1111/hae.14706.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Noone D, Astermark J, O’Mahoney B, et al. The journey of gene therapy in haemophilia – putting the patient at the centre of the hub and spoke model. J Haem Pract 2022; 9(1): 156-166. doi10.2478/jhp-2002-0021.NooneDAstermarkJO’MahoneyB.The journey of gene therapy in haemophilia – putting the patient at the centre of the hub and spoke model.2022;9(1):156-166. doi10.2478/jhp-2002-0021.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Fletcher S, Jenner K, Holland M, Chaplin S, Khair K. An exploration of why men with severe haemophilia might not want gene therapy: The Exigency study. Haemophilia 2021; 27(5): 760-768. doi: 10.1111/hae.14378.FletcherSJennerKHollandMChaplinSKhairK.An exploration of why men with severe haemophilia might not want gene therapy: The Exigency study.2021;27(5):760-768. doi:10.1111/hae.14378.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Valentino LA, Kaczmarek R, Pierce GF, Noone D, O’Mahoney B, Page D, Rotellini D, Skinner MW. Hemophilia gene therapy: First do no harm. J Thromb Haemost 2023 June 21. doi: 10.1016/j.tha.2023.06.016. [Epub ahead of print].ValentinoLAKaczmarekRPierceGFNooneDO’MahoneyBPageDRotelliniDSkinnerMW.Hemophilia gene therapy: First do no harm.2023June21. doi:10.1016/j.tha.2023.06.016. [Epub ahead of print].Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Savioni L, Triberti S. Cognitive biases in chronic illness and their impact on patients’ commitment. Front Psychol 2020; 11: 579455. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.579455.SavioniLTribertiS.Cognitive biases in chronic illness and their impact on patients’ commitment.2020;11:579455. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.579455.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Khair K, Steadman L, Chaplin S, et al. Parental perspectives on gene therapy for children with haemophilia: The Exigency study. Haemophilia 2020; 27(1): 120-128. doi: 10.1111.KhairKSteadmanLChaplinS.Parental perspectives on gene therapy for children with haemophilia: The Exigency study.2020;27(1):120-128. doi:10.1111.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Politi MC, Dizon DS, Frosch DL, Kuzemchak MD, Stiggelbout AM. Importance of clarifying patients’ desired role in shared decision making to match their level of engagement with their preferences. BMJ 2013; 347: f7066. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f7066.PolitiMCDizonDSFroschDLKuzemchakMDStiggelboutAM.Importance of clarifying patients’ desired role in shared decision making to match their level of engagement with their preferences.2013;347:f7066. doi:10.1136/bmj.f7066.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
The SHARE Approach. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://www.ahrq.gov/health-literacy/professional-training/shared-decision/index.html (last accessed March 2023).The SHARE Approach.,Rockville, MD. https://www.ahrq.gov/health-literacy/professional-training/shared-decision/index.html(last accessed March 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Nossair F, Thornburg CD. The role of patient and healthcare professionals in the era of new haemophilia treatments in developed and developing countries. Ther Adv Hematol 2018; 9(8): 239-249. doi: 10.1177/2040620718784830.NossairFThornburgCD.The role of patient and healthcare professionals in the era of new haemophilia treatments in developed and developing countries.2018;9(8):239-249. doi:10.1177/2040620718784830.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Limjoco J, Thornburg CD. Gene therapy for hemophilia A: A mixed methods study of patient preferences and shared decision-making. Patient Prefer Adherence 2023 Apr 19;17:1093-1105. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S406894.LimjocoJThornburgCD.Gene therapy for hemophilia A: A mixed methods study of patient preferences and shared decision-making.2023Apr19;17:1093-1105. doi:10.2147/PPA.S406894.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Limjoco J, Thornburg CD. Development of a haemophilia A gene therapy shared decision-making tool for clinicians. Haemophilia 2023 July 4. doi: 10.1111/hae.14822. Epub ahead of print.LimjocoJThornburgCD.Development of a haemophilia A gene therapy shared decision-making tool for clinicians.2023July4. doi:10.1111/hae.14822. Epub ahead of print.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Noone D, Chadwick J, Coffin D, Hayes B, Kaeser G, Naccache M, Skinner M, Sannie T, Thornburg C, Pierce G. A new tool to assist in treatment selection – the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) shared decision making (SDM) tool. Presented at ISTH 2023 (in press).NooneDChadwickJCoffinDHayesBKaeserGNaccacheMSkinnerMSannieTThornburgCPierceG..Presented at ISTH 2023(in press).Search in Google Scholar
Fletcher S, Jenner K, Holland M, Khair K. Expectation and loss when gene therapy for haemophilia is not an option: An Exigency sub-study. Haemophilia 2023; 29(3): 776-783. doi: 10.1111/hae.14774.FletcherSJennerKHollandMKhairK.Expectation and loss when gene therapy for haemophilia is not an option: An Exigency sub-study.2023;29(3):776-783. doi:10.1111/hae.14774.Open DOISearch in Google Scholar