ICD replacement | Right Decisions

Healthcare Improvement Scotland has assessed this shared decision aid against the following quality criteria. The quality criteria are based on national and international standards for shared decision aids.

Criterion	Assessment	More information
Process
1.Has information available about the updating policy.	Met	We try our best to keep up with the latest research and take all feedback into account as we update our tools in order to provide patients and clinicians with the most accurate information when making a decision about their health care.
2.Provides an indication that the shared decision aid is underpinned by evidence.	Met	Generally extensive desriptions of evidence base - in associated documentation https://patientdecisionai d.org/wpcontent/uploads/2020/0 3/2021.03.02-EvidenceDocument-DECIDEICD.pdf BUT the link for this particular one not working - have extraploated 'met' based on the ICD aid
3.Provides information about the levels of uncertainty around event or outcome probabilities, e.g. by giving a range or by using phases such as ‘our best estimate is.	Partially Met	While no-one can predict the future
4.An equality impact assessment has been carried out to identify impact on inequalities groups.	No Info
Content
1.Provides a production or publication date.	Met	Last Update 10/24/17.
2. Provides information about country of publication.	Met	USA
3. Describes the health condition or issue for which the decision is required.	Met	what is an ICD? Section and Making a choice about ICD replacement
4.States the decision that needs to be considered.	Met	Two possible paths Making a choice about ICD replacement
5. Provides clear information about the potential consequences, benefits and harms of each option	Partially Met	Describes using timeline graphs but less detail on rates of harms compared with that offered in the ICD decision aid which I suggest this is an 'offshoot' of
6.Displays and frames options in a consistent, balanced and impartial way - for example, using the same sized font and neutral language	Partially Met	Path one and two and rates of death illustrated in mirrored diagrams - the text around why this might not be an easy decision seems to be focused towards the negative
7. Uses everyday language that is widely understood, or simpler language where necessary.	Met	Your direct input has an average reading ease of about 77.1 of 100. It should be easily understood by 13 to 14 year olds.
8. Shows that effort has been made to present quantitative information about risks, benefits, chance and uncertainty in a way that is understandable to people with low levels of numeracy	N/A
9. Is presented in a digital format that complies with accessibility standards,	Not Met