文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

Dutch Translation and Psychometric Testing of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and Shared Decision Making Questionnaire-Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc) in Primary and Secondary Care.

作者信息

Rodenburg-Vandenbussche Sumayah, Pieterse Arwen H, Kroonenberg Pieter M, Scholl Isabelle, van der Weijden Trudy, Luyten Gre P M, Kruitwagen Roy F P M, den Ouden Henk, Carlier Ingrid V E, van Vliet Irene M, Zitman Frans G, Stiggelbout Anne M

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2015 Jul 7;10(7):e0132158. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132158. eCollection 2015.


DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0132158
PMID:26151946
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4494856/
Abstract

PURPOSE: The SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc measure patient and physician perception of the extent of shared decision making (SDM) during a physician-patient consultation. So far, no self-report instrument for SDM was available in Dutch, and validation of the scales in other languages has been limited. The aim of this study was to translate both scales into Dutch and assess their psychometric characteristics. METHODS: Participants were patients and their treating physicians (general practitioners and medical specialists). Patients (N = 182) rated their consultation using the SDM-Q-9, 43 physicians rated their consultations using the SDM-Q-Doc (N = 201). Acceptability, reliability (internal consistency), and the factorial structure of the instruments were determined. For convergent validity the CPSpost was used. RESULTS: Reliabilities of both scales were high (alpha SDM-Q-9 0.88; SDM-Q-Doc 0.87). The SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc total scores correlated as expected with the CPSpost (SDM-Q-9: r = 0.29; SDM-Q-Doc: r = 0.48) and were significantly different between the CPSpost categories, with lowest mean scores when the physician made the decision alone. Principal Component Analyses showed a two-component model for each scale. A confirmatory factor analysis yielded a mediocre, but acceptable, one-factor model, if Item 1 was excluded; for both scales the best indices of fit were obtained for a one-factor solution, if both Items 1 and 9 were excluded. CONCLUSION: The Dutch SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrate good acceptance and reliability; they correlated as expected with the CPSpost and are suitable for use in Dutch primary and specialised care. Although the best model fit was found when excluding Items 1 and 9, we believe these items address important aspects of SDM. Therefore, also based on the coherence with theory and comparability with other studies, we suggest keeping all nine items of the scale. Further research on the SDM-concept in patients and physicians, in different clinical settings and different countries, is necessary to gain a better understanding of the SDM-construct and its measurement.

摘要
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e79/4494856/25350eb3fcd0/pone.0132158.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e79/4494856/b8c99ae9cfdd/pone.0132158.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e79/4494856/25350eb3fcd0/pone.0132158.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e79/4494856/b8c99ae9cfdd/pone.0132158.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e79/4494856/25350eb3fcd0/pone.0132158.g002.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Dutch Translation and Psychometric Testing of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and Shared Decision Making Questionnaire-Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc) in Primary and Secondary Care.

PLoS One. 2015-7-7

[2]
Validity and reliability of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a national survey in Hungary.

Eur J Health Econ. 2019-5-20

[3]
Validation of the Spanish version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire.

Health Expect. 2015-12

[4]
Psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire for shared decision-making in multiple sclerosis: item response theory modelling and confirmatory factor analysis.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017-4-22

[5]
Association between physicians' and patients' perspectives of shared decision making in primary care settings in Japan: The impact of environmental factors.

PLoS One. 2021

[6]
Development and psychometric properties of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire--physician version (SDM-Q-Doc).

Patient Educ Couns. 2012-4-3

[7]
Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity.

Health Expect. 2012-11-26

[8]
Testing psychometric properties of Shared Decision Making Questionnaire - Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc) in an Italian real-world psychiatric clinical sample.

Riv Psichiatr. 2023

[9]
Validation of SDM-Q-Doc Questionnaire to measure shared decision-making physician's perspective in oncology practice.

Clin Transl Oncol. 2017-5-11

[10]
Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: the entire process from translation to validation.

BMJ Open. 2019-4-4

引用本文的文献

[1]
Evaluating the feasibility of study methods for a future trial-based economic evaluation of a multistage shared decision-making program for type 2 diabetes mellitus: Protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled pilot study.

PLoS One. 2025-8-5

[2]
Psychometric Validation and Reliability of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: A Systematic Review.

Iran J Public Health. 2025-6

[3]
The impact of a patient decision aid for patients with advanced laryngeal carcinoma - a multicenter study.

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025-7-1

[4]
Improving shared decision‑making between paediatric haematologists, children with sickle cell disease, and their parents: an observational post-intervention study.

Eur J Pediatr. 2025-6-12

[5]
Psychometric properties of the Danish SDM-Q-9 questionnaire for shared decision-making in patients with pelvic floor disorders and low back pain: item response theory modelling.

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025-5-19

[6]
Response process validity of the 9-item shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a cognitive interview study with patients with cancer.

Sci Rep. 2025-5-3

[7]
Shared Decision-Making (SDM) for Female SUI: Current Practice in Three Western Countries.

Int Urogynecol J. 2025-4-17

[8]
Translation and Psychometric Evaluation in Cancer Care of the German Version of collaboRATE-a 3-item Patient-reported Measure of Shared Decision-Making.

Health Expect. 2025-4

[9]
A decision aid is not the quick fix for improving shared decision-making in advanced Parkinson's disease: results of a mixed methods feasibility study.

J Neurol. 2025-3-13

[10]
Practice variation in induction of labour: women's role in the decision-making process.

Res Health Serv Reg. 2025-2-19

本文引用的文献

[1]
Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes.

Med Decis Making. 2015-1

[2]
Understanding patient perceptions of shared decision making.

Patient Educ Couns. 2014-9

[3]
Validation of the Spanish version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire.

Health Expect. 2015-12

[4]
Shared decision making in psychiatric practice and the primary care setting is unique, as measured using a 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9).

Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2013-7-30

[5]
Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity.

Health Expect. 2012-11-26

[6]
Short communication: Where is SDM at home? putting theoretical constraints on the way shared decision making is measured.

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2012

[7]
Development and psychometric properties of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire--physician version (SDM-Q-Doc).

Patient Educ Couns. 2012-4-3

[8]
Shared decision making and other variables as correlates of satisfaction with health care decisions in a United States national survey.

Patient Educ Couns. 2012-3-11

[9]
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare.

BMJ. 2012-1-27

[10]
Patients' and observers' perceptions of involvement differ. Validation study on inter-relating measures for shared decision making.

PLoS One. 2011-10-17

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索