• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
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
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
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 @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

测量儿科门诊环境中的共享决策:美国中西部讲英语和西班牙语的父母使用 SDM-Q-9 和 CollaboRATE 的心理测量学性能。

Measuring shared decision-making in the pediatric outpatient setting: Psychometric performance of the SDM-Q-9 and CollaboRATE among English and Spanish speaking parents in the US Midwest.

机构信息

Health Services and Outcomes Research, Children's Mercy Hospitals and Clinics, Kansas City, USA.

Health Services and Outcomes Research, Children's Mercy Hospitals and Clinics, Kansas City, USA.

出版信息

Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Apr;102(4):742-748. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.10.015. Epub 2018 Oct 23.

DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2018.10.015
PMID:30448047
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) measures have never been assessed for validity and feasibility in pediatric outpatient settings. We compared psychometric performance of parent adaptations of a well-established measure (SDM-Q-9) to a newer measure focusing on provider effort in facilitating SDM (CollaboRATE) in two clinics.

METHODS

English (n = 955) and Spanish (n = 58) speaking parents of children ages 1-5 years with symptoms of acute respiratory tract infections (ARTI) completed post-visit SDM-Q-9, CollaboRATE, satisfaction items (visit, provider communication, and study participation), and qualitative feedback.

RESULTS

Parents felt CollaboRATE was more comprehensible and relevant than SDM-Q-9, which refers to decision-making actions difficult to define in ARTI visits. Among English-speakers, both measures showed high internal consistency (α = 0.91, α = 0.97). SDM-Q-9 reliability was strong (split-half, r = 0.83) and CollaboRATE weak-to-moderate (two-week test-retest, ρ = 0.41-0.66). Convergent validity with communication and visit satisfaction was poor for SDM-Q-9 (r=0.38, r=0.34) but higher for CollaboRATE (r=0.59, r = 0.52). Both showed divergent validity with study participation satisfaction (r=0.08, r=0.13). Spanish versions demonstrated similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Parent preference and correlations with satisfaction support CollaboRATE over SDM-Q-9, however psychometrics were borderline acceptable.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Tools like CollaboRATE that focus on provider effort appear more appropriate for routine pediatric visits where SDM outcomes may be difficult to identify, yet additional validation research is needed.

摘要

目的

在儿科门诊环境中,从未评估过共享决策(SDM)措施的有效性和可行性。我们比较了两种诊所中经过家长改编的成熟测量工具(SDM-Q-9)和一个新的侧重于促进 SDM 的提供者努力的测量工具(CollaboRATE)的心理测量性能。

方法

患有急性呼吸道感染(ARTI)症状的 1-5 岁儿童的英语(n=955)和西班牙语(n=58)家长在就诊后完成了 SDM-Q-9、CollaboRATE、满意度项目(就诊、提供方沟通和参与研究)以及定性反馈。

结果

家长认为 CollaboRATE 比 SDM-Q-9 更易理解和相关,后者指的是在 ARTI 就诊中难以界定的决策行为。在讲英语的家长中,这两种措施都表现出较高的内部一致性(α=0.91,α=0.97)。SDM-Q-9 的可靠性很强(分半信度,r=0.83),而 CollaboRATE 的可靠性则较弱到中等(两周重测信度,ρ=0.41-0.66)。与沟通和就诊满意度的聚合效度较差,而与研究参与满意度的聚合效度较高(r=0.38,r=0.34)。而与研究参与满意度的相关性则较低(r=0.08,r=0.13)。西班牙语版本也得到了类似的结果。

结论

家长的偏好和与满意度的相关性支持 CollaboRATE 优于 SDM-Q-9,但是心理测量学的结果是可以接受的。

实践意义

像 CollaboRATE 这样专注于提供者努力的工具似乎更适合于常规儿科就诊,因为在这种情况下,SDM 的结果可能难以确定,但还需要进行更多的验证研究。

相似文献

1
Measuring shared decision-making in the pediatric outpatient setting: Psychometric performance of the SDM-Q-9 and CollaboRATE among English and Spanish speaking parents in the US Midwest.测量儿科门诊环境中的共享决策:美国中西部讲英语和西班牙语的父母使用 SDM-Q-9 和 CollaboRATE 的心理测量学性能。
Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Apr;102(4):742-748. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.10.015. Epub 2018 Oct 23.
2
Validation of the Spanish version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire.9项共同决策问卷西班牙语版本的验证
Health Expect. 2015 Dec;18(6):2143-53. doi: 10.1111/hex.12183. Epub 2014 Mar 5.
3
The psychometric properties of CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of the shared decision-making process.CollaboRATE的心理测量特性:一种快速且简洁的患者报告的共同决策过程测量方法。
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Jan 3;16(1):e2. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3085.
4
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.9项共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)和共同决策问卷-医生版(SDM-Q-Doc)在初级和二级医疗保健中的荷兰语翻译及心理测量测试
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 7;10(7):e0132158. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132158. eCollection 2015.
5
Psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire for shared decision-making in multiple sclerosis: item response theory modelling and confirmatory factor analysis.用于多发性硬化症共同决策的SDM-Q-9问卷的心理测量特性:项目反应理论建模与验证性因素分析
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Apr 22;15(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0656-2.
6
Validity and reliability of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a national survey in Hungary.匈牙利全国性调查中 9 项共享决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)的有效性和可靠性。
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Jun;20(Suppl 1):43-55. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01061-2. Epub 2019 May 20.
7
Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity.比较九项共享决策问卷与 OPTION 量表——尝试建立聚合效度。
Health Expect. 2015 Feb;18(1):137-50. doi: 10.1111/hex.12022. Epub 2012 Nov 26.
8
Measuring empathy in pediatrics: validation of the Visual CARE measure.儿科共情测量:视觉关怀量表的验证
BMC Pediatr. 2018 Feb 13;18(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12887-018-1050-x.
9
Psychometrics of shared decision making and communication as patient centered measures for two language groups.作为针对两个语言群体的以患者为中心的衡量指标的共同决策与沟通的心理测量学
Psychol Assess. 2016 Sep;28(9):1074-86. doi: 10.1037/pas0000344.
10
Comparison of the CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires to appreciate the patient-reported level of shared decision-making.比较 CollaboRATE 和 SDM-Q-9 问卷,以了解患者报告的共享决策水平。
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Jul;105(7):2475-2479. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.03.007. Epub 2022 Mar 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Translation and Psychometric Evaluation in Cancer Care of the German Version of collaboRATE-a 3-item Patient-reported Measure of Shared Decision-Making.collaboRATE德文版在癌症护理中的翻译及心理测量评估——一项用于衡量共同决策的3项患者报告指标
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70255. doi: 10.1111/hex.70255.
2
Multiethnic Perspectives of Shared Decision-Making in Hypertension: A Mixed-Methods Study.多民族视角下的高血压共同决策:一项混合方法研究。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Jul 16;13(14):e032568. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.032568. Epub 2024 Jul 11.
3
Patient leaflets on respiratory tract infections did not improve shared decision making and antibiotic prescriptions in a low-prescriber setting.
呼吸道感染患者手册并未改善低处方环境下的共同决策和抗生素处方。
Sci Rep. 2024 Feb 29;14(1):4978. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-55166-7.
4
Let's Talk About Antibiotics: a randomised trial of two interventions to reduce antibiotic misuse.让我们谈谈抗生素:一项随机试验,旨在评估两种干预措施减少抗生素滥用的效果。
BMJ Open. 2022 Nov 21;12(11):e049258. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049258.
5
The relationship between evaluation of shared decision-making by pet owners and veterinarians and satisfaction with veterinary consultations.宠物主人和兽医对共同决策评估的关系与兽医咨询满意度之间的关系。
BMC Vet Res. 2022 Aug 2;18(1):296. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03401-6.
6
Evaluating Patient and Family Experience Among Spanish-Speaking and LatinX Patients: a Scoping Review of Existing Instruments.评估西班牙语和拉丁裔患者及其家属的就医体验:现有工具的范围综述。
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2023 Aug;10(4):1878-1898. doi: 10.1007/s40615-022-01371-x. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
7
Pediatric Caregiver Version of the Shared Decision Making Process Scale: Validity and Reliability for ADHD Treatment Decisions.儿科照顾者共享决策过程量表版本:用于 ADHD 治疗决策的有效性和可靠性。
Acad Pediatr. 2022 Nov-Dec;22(8):1503-1509. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2022.07.014. Epub 2022 Jul 27.
8
A patient decision aid for breast cancer patients deciding on their radiation treatment, no change in decisional conflict but better informed choices.一种用于乳腺癌患者决定放疗方案的患者决策辅助工具,决策冲突无变化,但选择更明智。
Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2021 Aug 29;20:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2021.08.002. eCollection 2021 Dec.
9
Assessing Shared Decision-Making in Cystic Fibrosis Care Using collaboRATE: A Cross-Sectional Study of 159 Programs.使用collaboRATE评估囊性纤维化护理中的共同决策:一项对159个项目的横断面研究。
J Patient Exp. 2021 Aug 20;8:23743735211034032. doi: 10.1177/23743735211034032. eCollection 2021.
10
Implementing a breast cancer patient decision aid: Process evaluation using medical files and the patients' perspective.实施乳腺癌患者决策辅助工具:使用医疗档案和患者视角进行的过程评估。
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2021 Jul;30(4):e13387. doi: 10.1111/ecc.13387. Epub 2020 Dec 13.