Table 1.

Characteristics of included studies

Study	Design	N	Intervention	Age	Outcomes	Conclusion & legal decision	Quality scores
Barry et al. [28]	Quasi-experimental (simulated scenarios)	47	A video-based decision aid for PSA testing	20-70, M = 50	- Focus group voting results: whether the physician met the standard of care.	- Standard of care met if a shared decision-making process is documented in the patients’ notes: voted by 72% of mock jurors	10/26
						- Standard of care met if decision aid used prior to decision-making: voted by 94% of mock jurors
Beckman et al. [27]	Qualitative study	45	NA	20-80	- Reason for litigation;	- Relationship issues identified in 71% of the depositions.	7/10
					- Specialties of physicians;	- 68% of all issues identified related to the physician’s failure to communicate clearly and transparently and to consider the patient and family views and preferences
					- Type and frequency of relationship issues;
					- Who suggested maloccurence.
Merenstein [29]	Case study	1	NA	53	- Causes and outcome of the medical malpractice trial	Dr Merenstein’s residency was found liable for not meeting the standard of care, despite having complied with the principles of shared decision-making, evidence-based medicine and the National guidelines.	6/29
Stapleton et al. [30]	Qualitative study (observation and in depth interviews)	886	Evidence-based leaflets for pregnancy	Not known	- Participants’ views on the use of evidence-based leaflets and its influence on litigation	Health care providers felt that ordering more tests and procedures offered better protection against litigation than promoting evidence-based leaflets and patient preferences.	7/10
Um [31]	Case study	1	NA	33	- Causes and outcome of the medical malpractice trial	An obstetrician who discounted his patient’s wish to undergo amniocentesis testing was found guilty for interfering with the patient’s self-determination, after the plaintiff gave birth to a baby diagnosed with Down’s syndrome.	14/29