Measuring (shared) decision-making--a review of psychometric instruments.
Standard
Measuring (shared) decision-making--a review of psychometric instruments. / Simon, Daniela; Loh, Andreas; Härter, Martin.
In: Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich, Vol. 101, No. 4, 4, 2007, p. 259-267.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Measuring (shared) decision-making--a review of psychometric instruments.
AU - Simon, Daniela
AU - Loh, Andreas
AU - Härter, Martin
PY - 2007
Y1 - 2007
N2 - In recent years shared decision-making (SDM) has gained importance as an appropriate approach to patient-physician communication and decision-making. However, there is a conceptual variety that implies problems of inconsistent measurement, of defining relationships of SDM and outcome measures, and of comparisons across different studies. This article presents the results of a literature search of psychometric instruments measuring aspects of decision-making. Altogether 18 scales were found. The majority covers the patients' perspective and relates to preferences for information and participation, decisional conflict, self-efficacy as well as to the evaluation of decision-making process and outcomes. The scales differ widely in their extent of validation. Although this review is not exhaustive, it presents a variety of available decision-making instruments. Yet, many of them still need to show their psychometric quality for other settings in further studies.
AB - In recent years shared decision-making (SDM) has gained importance as an appropriate approach to patient-physician communication and decision-making. However, there is a conceptual variety that implies problems of inconsistent measurement, of defining relationships of SDM and outcome measures, and of comparisons across different studies. This article presents the results of a literature search of psychometric instruments measuring aspects of decision-making. Altogether 18 scales were found. The majority covers the patients' perspective and relates to preferences for information and participation, decisional conflict, self-efficacy as well as to the evaluation of decision-making process and outcomes. The scales differ widely in their extent of validation. Although this review is not exhaustive, it presents a variety of available decision-making instruments. Yet, many of them still need to show their psychometric quality for other settings in further studies.
M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz
VL - 101
SP - 259
EP - 267
IS - 4
M1 - 4
ER -
