Comparing the nine‐item Shared Decision‐Making Questionnaire to the Option Scale – an attempt to establish convergent validity

Bibliographic Data

ID19508463
AuthorsIsabelle Scholl (0000-0002-7639-0880, Department of Medical Psychology University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf Hamburg), Levente Kriston (0000-0003-0748-264X, Department of Medical Psychology University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf Hamburg), Jörg Dirmaier (0000-0002-5729-7357, Department of Medical Psychology University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf Hamburg), Martin Härter (0000-0001-7443-9890, Department of Medical Psychology University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf Hamburg Germany)
Year2015
Volume18
Issue1
Pages137-150
Publication date2015-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.12022
PMID23176071
OpenAlexW2069252944
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited52

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

Concurrent validity · Convergent validity · Internal consistency · Psychometrics · Statistics · Attachment and Relationship Dynamics · Clinical Psychology · Computer Science · Healthcare Systems and Technology · Mathematics · Medicine · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology · Artificial Intelligence

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access