Suppr超能文献

中文版决策冲突量表在中国女性乳腺癌手术决策中的心理测量学评估

Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the decisional conflict scale in Chinese women making decision for breast cancer surgery.

作者信息

Lam Wendy W T, Kwok Marie, Liao Qiuyan, Chan Miranda, Or Amy, Kwong Ava, Suen Dacita, Fielding Richard

机构信息

Department of Community Medicine and Unit for Behavioural Sciences, Centre for Psycho-oncological Research and Training, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2015 Apr;18(2):210-20. doi: 10.1111/hex.12021. Epub 2012 Nov 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The decisional conflict scale (DCS) measures the perception of uncertainty in choosing options, factors contributing to decision conflict and effective decision making. This study examined the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the DCS in Hong Kong Chinese women deciding breast cancer (BC) surgery.

METHOD

A Chinese version of the 16-item DCS was administered to 471 women awaiting initial consultation for BC diagnosis. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the factor structure. Internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validities of the factor structure were assessed.

RESULTS

CFA revealed the original factor structure of the DCS showed poor fit to this sample. Exploratory factor analysis revealed an alternative three-factor structure, Informed and Values Clarity, Uncertainty and Effective Decision and Support, was optimal. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.51 to 0.87. Correlations between decision-making difficulties and satisfaction with medical consultation demonstrated acceptable convergent validity. Construct validity was supported by correlations between decision regret and psychological distress. Discriminant validity was supported by differentiation between delaying and non-delaying decision-makers.

CONCLUSIONS

The three-factor DCS-14 is a valid and practical measure for assessing decisional conflict in deciding BC surgery. It shows good potential for use in assessing decision satisfaction for women diagnosed with BC.

摘要

目的

决策冲突量表(DCS)用于衡量在选择方案时的不确定性感知、导致决策冲突的因素以及有效的决策制定。本研究检验了中文版DCS在香港华裔女性决定接受乳腺癌(BC)手术时的有效性和可靠性。

方法

对471名等待首次乳腺癌诊断咨询的女性进行了中文版的16项DCS测试。验证性因素分析(CFA)评估因素结构。评估了因素结构的内部一致性、收敛效度和区分效度。

结果

CFA显示DCS的原始因素结构与该样本的拟合度较差。探索性因素分析显示,一个替代的三因素结构,即信息与价值观清晰、不确定性与有效决策以及支持,是最佳的。克朗巴哈系数在0.51至0.87之间。决策困难与对医疗咨询满意度之间的相关性显示出可接受的收敛效度。决策后悔与心理困扰之间的相关性支持了结构效度。延迟和非延迟决策者之间的差异支持了区分效度。

结论

三因素DCS-14是评估乳腺癌手术决策中决策冲突的有效且实用的指标。它在评估乳腺癌诊断女性的决策满意度方面显示出良好的潜力。

相似文献

2
Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the brief illness perception questionnaire in breast cancer survivors.
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 20;12(3):e0174093. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174093. eCollection 2017.
5
7
The decisional conflict scale: further validation in two samples of Dutch oncology patients.
Patient Educ Couns. 2001 Dec 1;45(3):187-93. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(01)00120-3.
8
Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of Decisional Conflict Scale in Chinese Young Women Making HPV Vaccination Decisions.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022 Mar 24;16:761-769. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S358292. eCollection 2022.
10
Primary Breast Cancer Decision-making Among Chinese American Women: Satisfaction, Regret.
Nurs Res. 2015 Sep-Oct;64(5):391-401. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000116.

引用本文的文献

2
An online driving decision aid for older drivers reduces ambivalence and regret about driving decisions: Randomized trial.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025 Feb;73(2):492-505. doi: 10.1111/jgs.19293. Epub 2024 Dec 4.
6
Evaluating the Impact of a Training Program in Shared Decision-Making for Neurologists Treating People with Migraine.
Neurol Ther. 2023 Aug;12(4):1319-1334. doi: 10.1007/s40120-023-00495-4. Epub 2023 Jun 13.
7
Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of Decisional Conflict Scale in People with Migraine in Spain.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022 Dec 15;16:3291-3302. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S384333. eCollection 2022.
9
Decision-making about mastectomy among Chinese women with breast cancer: a mixed-methods study protocol.
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 20;12(4):e054685. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054685.
10
Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of Decisional Conflict Scale in Chinese Young Women Making HPV Vaccination Decisions.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022 Mar 24;16:761-769. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S358292. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

1
Structural Model Evaluation and Modification: An Interval Estimation Approach.
Multivariate Behav Res. 1990 Apr 1;25(2):173-80. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4.
2
3
Trajectories of psychological distress among Chinese women diagnosed with breast cancer.
Psychooncology. 2010 Oct;19(10):1044-51. doi: 10.1002/pon.1658.
4
Informed choice in mammography screening: a randomized trial of a decision aid for 70-year-old women.
Arch Intern Med. 2007 Oct 22;167(19):2039-46. doi: 10.1001/archinte.167.19.2039.
5
Cross-cultural validation of the Decisional Conflict Scale in a sample of French patients.
Qual Life Res. 2006 Aug;15(6):1063-8. doi: 10.1007/s11136-005-6003-9.
6
The Chinese Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale-revised (C-MISS-R): development and validation.
Qual Life Res. 2005 May;14(4):1187-92. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-2391-5.
7
An evaluation of the Decisional Conflict Scale for measuring the quality of end-of-life decision making.
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Jun;61(3):397-404. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.05.003. Epub 2005 Jun 20.
9
Validation of a decision regret scale.
Med Decis Making. 2003 Jul-Aug;23(4):281-92. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03256005.
10
Participation and satisfaction with surgical treatment decision-making in breast cancer among Chinese women.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003 Jul;80(2):171-80. doi: 10.1023/A:1024568732213.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验