Table 4. Characteristics of the included study protocols.

First author (year), country	study objectives*	study design	health care setting	SDM-Q-9 &/-Doc (assessment point)	primary or secondary outcome	intervention	decisional context
den Ouden et al., (2015), Netherlands	evaluate if a DA increases SDM	cRCT	primary care	SDM-Q-9 &-Doc (& adaptation for observer; assessment point n/r)	primary and secondary	DA & training	Type 2 Diabetes
Drewelow et al., (2012), Germany	evaluate if intervention is able to increase SDM	cRCT	primary care	SDM-Q-9 (assessment via phone calls)	secondary	PC based- DA, 2 group-trainings after peer-visit	Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Geiger et al., (2011), Germany	evaluate if intervention improves SDM	cRCT	outpatient specialty care	SDM-Q-9 (assessment point n/r)	secondary	video feedback based training & manual	n/r
Goss et al., (2015), Italy	evaluate a pre-consultation intervention to increase involvement in consultation	RCT	outpatient specialty care	SDM-Q-9 (adaptation for companion; directly after consultation)	secondary	question prompt sheet	breast cancer
Löffler et al., (2014), Germany	evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to reduce the number of long-term drugs	cRCT	inpatient primary & secondary** care	SDM-Q-9 (data collection at admission & phone call)	secondary	narrative-based medication review	chronic diseases, multimorbidity & polypharmacy
Savelberg et al, (2015), Netherlands	evaluate impact of DA on SDM	pre-/post-implementation study	inpatient specialty care	SDM-Q-9 &-Doc (assessment point n/r)	primary	DA website & training for HCP	surgical treatment of breast cancer

HCP = health care professional, DA = decision aid

* only objectives which could be answered with SDM-Q-9 &/-Doc

** aftercare, n/r = not reported