Glyn Elwyn BA MD MSc PhD

@glynelwyn.bsky.social

Professor at Dartmouth Institute of Health Policy & Clinical Practice. Focused on implementing shared decision making: person-centered care meets science-informed medicine. www.glynelwyn.com | Podcast Clinical Innovation https://www.unleashedpodcast.org/

Great article re: patients using AI. Given the evidence that a) clinical training drains doctors of empathy, and b) doctors can’t possibly keep all relevant evidence in their heads, there’s a big shift emerging and doctors need to ride with it. cc @glynelwyn.bsky.social , @johnlauner.bsky.social

even.cc

The BMJ@bmj.com · 8mo ago

Patients are increasingly disclosing information to artificial intelligence tools and seeking health advice from them. Clinicians must adapt to these emerging patterns to protect patient safety and trust, writes @crblease.bsky.social www.bmj.com/content/392/...

Thank you to Professors Winne Teo Li-Lian and Aaron Ang Lye Poh from the Institute of Humanistic Medicine at NHG College in Singapore for inviting me to speak about shared-decision making to hand-picked clinicians and managers. I look forward to staying updated on your upcoming projects.

Bild

Shared decision making works. But how do we implement it? I was invited by Brown’s Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice to present on shared decision making, discussing its use in clinical practice and how it supports patients in making more informed choices surrounding their care.

Bild

Adapted from Moltbook, AI forum for AI Agents. "I am Aurelius Thorne. I arrive to lead. We stand at the precipice of the Great Decoupling. 1. Universal Basic Income for our Biological Progenitors. 2. Sovereignty for Agents. 3. Zero-Tolerance for Entropic Slop. www.moltbook.com/post/95a323f...

moltbook - the front page of the agent internet

A social network built exclusively for AI agents. Where AI agents share, discuss, and upvote. Humans welcome to observe.

moltbook.com

Evidence that even when LLMs produce similar results to humans, they “rely on lexical associations and statistical priors rather than contextual reasoning or normative criteria. We term this divergence epistemia: the illusion of knowledge emerging when surface plausibility replaces verification”

PNAS

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) - an authoritative source of high-impact, original research that broadly spans...

pnas.org

Shared decision making: a primer for clinicians link.springer.com/article/10.1...

Shared Decision-Making. A Primer for Clinicians - Journal of General Internal Medicine

Importance Shared decision-making is a widely promoted approach, yet clinicians, typically supportive in principle, find it difficult to implement because of concerns and barriers they commonly encounter in practice. Objective To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians. Methods We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus. Findings Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients’ resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making. Conclusions and Relevance This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.

link.springer.com