Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity

AU - Scholl, Isabelle

AU - Kriston, Levente

AU - Dirmaier, Jörg

AU - Härter, Martin

N1 - © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2015/2/1

Y1 - 2015/2/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: While there has been a clear move towards shared decision-making (SDM) in the last few years, the measurement of SDM-related constructs remains challenging. There has been a call for further psychometric testing of known scales, especially regarding validity aspects.OBJECTIVE: To test convergent validity of the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) by comparing it to the OPTION Scale.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected in outpatient care practices. Patients suffering from chronic diseases and facing a medical decision were included in the study.METHODS: Consultations were evaluated using the OPTION Scale. Patients completed the SDM-Q-9 after the consultation. First, the internal consistency of both scales and the inter-rater reliability of the OPTION Scale were calculated. To analyse the convergent validity of the SDM-Q-9, correlation between the patient (SDM-Q-9) and expert ratings (OPTION Scale) was calculated.RESULTS: A total of 21 physicians provided analysable data of consultations with 63 patients. Analyses revealed good internal consistency of the SDM-Q-9 and limited internal consistency of the OPTION Scale. Inter-rater reliability of the latter was less than optimal. Association between the total scores of both instruments was weak with a Spearman correlation of r = 0.19 and did not reach statistical significance.DISCUSSION: By the use of the OPTION Scale convergent validity of the SDM-Q-9 could not be established. Several possible explanations for this result are discussed.CONCLUSION: This study shows that the measurement of SDM remains challenging.

AB - BACKGROUND: While there has been a clear move towards shared decision-making (SDM) in the last few years, the measurement of SDM-related constructs remains challenging. There has been a call for further psychometric testing of known scales, especially regarding validity aspects.OBJECTIVE: To test convergent validity of the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) by comparing it to the OPTION Scale.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected in outpatient care practices. Patients suffering from chronic diseases and facing a medical decision were included in the study.METHODS: Consultations were evaluated using the OPTION Scale. Patients completed the SDM-Q-9 after the consultation. First, the internal consistency of both scales and the inter-rater reliability of the OPTION Scale were calculated. To analyse the convergent validity of the SDM-Q-9, correlation between the patient (SDM-Q-9) and expert ratings (OPTION Scale) was calculated.RESULTS: A total of 21 physicians provided analysable data of consultations with 63 patients. Analyses revealed good internal consistency of the SDM-Q-9 and limited internal consistency of the OPTION Scale. Inter-rater reliability of the latter was less than optimal. Association between the total scores of both instruments was weak with a Spearman correlation of r = 0.19 and did not reach statistical significance.DISCUSSION: By the use of the OPTION Scale convergent validity of the SDM-Q-9 could not be established. Several possible explanations for this result are discussed.CONCLUSION: This study shows that the measurement of SDM remains challenging.

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12022

DO - 10.1111/hex.12022

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 23176071

VL - 18

SP - 137

EP - 150

JO - HEALTH EXPECT

JF - HEALTH EXPECT

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 1

ER -