Table 2.

Overview of definitions, interventions, outcomes and effects, and strengths and limitations.

References	Definitions and concepts	Interventions	Outcomes and effects	Strengths (S) and limitations (L)
Dwamena et al. (9)	- Share control of consultations, decisions about interventions, or management of health problems, and/or - Focus on patient as person rather than disease	- Training for providers only - Training for providers combined with training or general educational materials for patients - Training for providers combined with condition-specific training or materials for providers - Training for providers combined with condition-specific materials or training for both providers and patients	- Positive on consultation process: 80% (28/35) - Positive on satisfaction: 46% (12/26) - Positive on behavior: 47% (8/17) - Positive on health status: 46% (12/26)	- S: focus on RCTs allowing meta-analysis - L: exclusion of non RCTs, heterogeneous and multiplicity of outcome measures
Rathert et al. (14)	- Respect for patient preferences - Information, education, communication - Coordination of care - Emotional support - Physical comfort - Involvement of family - Continuity & transition - Access to care	- Individualized treatment planning in collaboration with patients or training of practitioner - Information and communication processes - Focusing on all dimensions of quality of care - Focusing on other dimension of care	- Positive on satisfaction and patient well-being - In general mixed results on clinical and long-term outcomes - More positive outcomes	- L: inability to combine results of varied interventions, surveys, and outcome measures, difficulties in comparing interventions poorly described, small sample sizes in some studies
McMillan et al. (15)	- Holistic care - Individualized care - Respectful care - Empowering care.	- Complex interventions, e.g., Provision of tailored action plan, service referrals, follow-ups, and feedback - Simple intervention, one condition, e.g., Provision of medical record and treatment plan, lists of questions for patients - Training to providers to apply patient-centered care - Observation of interactions between patients and health providers	- Mixed findings, with improvements in some clinical indicators and negative impact on others - Positive on satisfaction when patients were engaged - Positive on quality of care, but little impact on clinical outcomes	- S: first systematic assessment of RCTs - L: variability in definitions and outcome measures, lack of detail about interventions, high risk of bias in most studies
Park et al. (16)	- Holistic approach to delivering respectful and individualized care, and - Offering choice through a therapeutic relationship where persons are empowered to be involved in health decisions	- Applied to patients, e.g., Physical support, education, training, and consulting, empowerment, emotional or environmental support - Applied to family members, e.g., Involvement in care, information sharing, shared decision making - Applied to healthcare providers, e.g., Education and training programs, coordination and continuity of care	- Positive on 75% (104/139) of outcomes - Neutral on 20% (28/139) of outcomes - Negative on 5% (7/139) of outcomes	- S: first review of systematic reviews on patient - and family-centered care-related interventions, comprehensive literature search of six electronic databases, followed by manual search - L: no consensus on definition, wide range of diverse subjects and interventions difficult to compare, limited quality of evidence from primary studies