• 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

共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)在肿瘤学实践中的心理测量学特性。

Psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in oncology practice.

作者信息

Calderon Caterina, Jiménez-Fonseca Paula, Ferrando Pere Joan, Jara Carlos, Lorenzo-Seva Urbano, Beato Carmen, García-García Teresa, Castelo Beatriz, Ramchandani Avinash, Muñoz María Mar, Martínez de Castro Eva, Ghanem Ismael, Mangas Montse, Carmona-Bayonas Alberto

机构信息

Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychobiology. Faculty of Psychology. University of Barcelona, Spain.

Department of Medical Oncology. Hospital Universitario Central of Asturias, Oviedo, Spain.

出版信息

Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2018 May-Aug;18(2):143-151. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.12.001. Epub 2018 Feb 13.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.12.001
PMID:30487919
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6225052/
Abstract

This study sought to assess the psychometric properties of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in patients with resected, non-metastatic cancer and eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy. A total of 568 patients were recruited from a multi-institutional, prospective, transversal study. Patients answered the SDM-Q-9 after visiting their medical oncologist who, in turn, completed the SDM-Q-Physician version. Reliability, factorial structures [exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)], and convergent validity of the SDM-Q-9 scores were explored. SDM-Q-9 showed a clear factorial structure, compatible with a strong and replicable general factor and a secondary group factor, in patients with resected, non-metastatic cancer. Total sum scores derived from the general factor showed good reliability in terms of omega coefficient: .90. The association between patient and physician perception of SDM was weak and failed to reach statistical significance. Males and patients over 60 years of age displayed the greatest satisfaction with SDM. SDM-Q-9 can aid in evaluating SDM from the cancer patients' perspective. SDM-Q-9 is helpful in studies examining patient perspectives of SDM and as an indicator of the degree of quality and satisfaction with health care and patient-physician relationship.

摘要

本研究旨在评估9项共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)在接受手术切除、无转移且适合辅助化疗的癌症患者中的心理测量学特性。从一项多机构、前瞻性横断面研究中招募了总共568名患者。患者在拜访肿瘤内科医生后回答SDM-Q-9问卷,而肿瘤内科医生则完成SDM-Q-医生版问卷。对SDM-Q-9评分的信度、因子结构[探索性因子分析(EFA)、验证性因子分析(CFA)]和收敛效度进行了探索。在接受手术切除、无转移的癌症患者中,SDM-Q-9呈现出清晰的因子结构,与一个强大且可重复的一般因子和一个次要组因子相符。从一般因子得出的总分在ω系数方面显示出良好的信度:0.90。患者和医生对共同决策的认知之间的关联较弱,未达到统计学显著性水平。60岁及以上的男性和患者对共同决策的满意度最高。SDM-Q-9有助于从癌症患者的角度评估共同决策。SDM-Q-9有助于研究了解患者对共同决策的看法,并作为医疗保健质量和满意度以及医患关系程度的指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ff99/6225052/fd6b6d876dcf/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ff99/6225052/fd6b6d876dcf/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ff99/6225052/fd6b6d876dcf/gr1.jpg

相似文献

1
Psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in oncology practice.共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)在肿瘤学实践中的心理测量学特性。
Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2018 May-Aug;18(2):143-151. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.12.001. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
2
Validation of SDM-Q-Doc Questionnaire to measure shared decision-making physician's perspective in oncology practice.验证 SDM-Q-Doc 问卷以衡量肿瘤学实践中医生的共享决策观点。
Clin Transl Oncol. 2017 Nov;19(11):1312-1319. doi: 10.1007/s12094-017-1671-9. Epub 2017 May 11.
3
Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting.验证肿瘤学环境中患者版和医生版共同决策问卷
Health Promot Perspect. 2019 May 25;9(2):105-114. doi: 10.15171/hpp.2019.15. eCollection 2019.
4
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.
5
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.
6
Testing psychometric properties of Shared Decision Making Questionnaire - Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc) in an Italian real-world psychiatric clinical sample.测试共享决策问卷-医生版(SDM-Q-Doc)在意大利真实精神科临床样本中的心理计量学特性。
Riv Psichiatr. 2023 Jul-Aug;58(4):167-174. doi: 10.1708/4064.40479.
7
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.
8
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.
9
Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: the entire process from translation to validation.阿拉伯文版 9 项共享决策问卷的心理测量学特性:从翻译到验证的全过程。
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 4;9(4):e026672. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026672.
10
Psychometric Evaluation of the Japanese 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and Its Association with Decision Conflict and Patient Factors in Japanese Primary Care.日本9项共同决策问卷的心理测量学评价及其与日本初级保健中决策冲突和患者因素的关联
JMA J. 2020 Jul 15;3(3):208-215. doi: 10.31662/jmaj.2019-0069. Epub 2020 Jul 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Decision-Making preferences in advanced cancer patients: associations with sociodemographic and psychological factors.晚期癌症患者的决策偏好:与社会人口学和心理因素的关联
BMC Palliat Care. 2025 Jul 1;24(1):174. doi: 10.1186/s12904-025-01806-2.
2
Response process validity of the 9-item shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a cognitive interview study with patients with cancer.在一项针对癌症患者的认知访谈研究中,9项共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)的反应过程效度。
Sci Rep. 2025 May 3;15(1):15479. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-99640-2.
3
Mediation role of perceived social support between recurrence risk perception and health behaviour among patients with stroke in China: a cross-sectional study.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessing the Quality and Appropriateness of Factor Solutions and Factor Score Estimates in Exploratory Item Factor Analysis.评估探索性项目因子分析中因子解和因子得分估计的质量与适宜性。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2018 Oct;78(5):762-780. doi: 10.1177/0013164417719308. Epub 2017 Jul 7.
2
Psychological treatments to improve quality of life in cancer contexts: A meta-analysis.改善癌症患者生活质量的心理治疗:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2016 May-Aug;16(2):211-219. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.07.005. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
3
Validation of SDM-Q-Doc Questionnaire to measure shared decision-making physician's perspective in oncology practice.
中国脑卒中患者复发风险感知与健康行为之间的感知社会支持的中介作用:一项横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Feb 13;14(2):e079812. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079812.
4
Effect of a Peer Comparison and Educational Intervention on Medical Test Conversation Quality: A Randomized Clinical Trial.同伴比较和教育干预对医疗测试对话质量的影响:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Nov 1;6(11):e2342464. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.42464.
5
Shared decision making in recurrent ovarian cancer: Implementation of patient decision aids across three departments of oncology in Denmark.复发性卵巢癌的共同决策:丹麦三个肿瘤科对患者决策辅助工具的应用
PEC Innov. 2022 Nov 1;1:100095. doi: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100095. eCollection 2022 Dec.
6
The Relationship between Therapeutic Alliance and Quality of Care in Patients with Advanced Cancer in Spain.西班牙晚期癌症患者治疗联盟与护理质量之间的关系。
Curr Oncol. 2023 Mar 24;30(4):3580-3589. doi: 10.3390/curroncol30040273.
7
Shared decision making for patients with breast and gynecologic malignancies undergoing chemotherapy associated with persistent alopecia.针对接受与持续性脱发相关化疗的乳腺癌和妇科恶性肿瘤患者的共同决策。
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2022 Oct 29;44:101095. doi: 10.1016/j.gore.2022.101095. eCollection 2022 Dec.
8
Proactive, Recovery-Oriented Treatment Navigation to Engage Racially Diverse Veterans in Mental Healthcare (PARTNER-MH), a Peer-Led Patient Navigation Intervention for Racially and Ethnically Minoritized Veterans in Veterans Health Administration Mental Health Services: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Randomized Controlled Feasibility Study.积极主动、以康复为导向的治疗引导,促使不同种族退伍军人参与心理健康护理(PARTNER-MH),这是一项针对退伍军人健康管理局心理健康服务中种族和族裔少数退伍军人的同伴主导的患者引导干预措施:混合方法随机对照可行性研究方案。
JMIR Res Protoc. 2022 Sep 6;11(9):e37712. doi: 10.2196/37712.
9
Shared Decision Making: The 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire Does Not Discriminate Between Surgeons.共同决策:9项共同决策问卷无法区分外科医生。
Cureus. 2021 Apr 3;13(4):e14274. doi: 10.7759/cureus.14274.
10
Needs assessment for a decision support tool in oral cancer requiring major resection and reconstruction: a mixed-methods study protocol.口腔癌需进行大面积切除与重建的决策支持工具的需求评估:一项混合方法研究方案
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 23;10(11):e036969. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036969.
验证 SDM-Q-Doc 问卷以衡量肿瘤学实践中医生的共享决策观点。
Clin Transl Oncol. 2017 Nov;19(11):1312-1319. doi: 10.1007/s12094-017-1671-9. Epub 2017 May 11.
4
Patient and physician views of shared decision making in cancer.患者和医生对癌症共同决策的看法。
Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1248-1253. doi: 10.1111/hex.12564. Epub 2017 May 2.
5
Predictors of physicians' communication performance in a decision-making encounter with a simulated advanced-stage cancer patient: A longitudinal study.预测医生在与模拟晚期癌症患者的决策性接触中的沟通表现的因素:一项纵向研究。
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Sep;100(9):1672-1679. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.02.025. Epub 2017 Mar 4.
6
Cancer patients' control preferences in decision making and associations with patient-reported outcomes: a prospective study in an outpatient cancer center.癌症患者在决策中的控制偏好及其与患者报告结局的关联:一项在门诊癌症中心进行的前瞻性研究。
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Sep;25(9):2753-2760. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3686-8. Epub 2017 Mar 29.
7
The cost and burden of cancer in the European Union 1995-2014.1995 - 2014年欧盟癌症的成本与负担
Eur J Cancer. 2016 Oct;66:162-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.06.022. Epub 2016 Aug 31.
8
Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices.评估双因子模型:计算和解释统计指数。
Psychol Methods. 2016 Jun;21(2):137-50. doi: 10.1037/met0000045. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
9
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.
10
Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes.证据何在?共享决策制定与患者预后的系统评价。
Med Decis Making. 2015 Jan;35(1):114-31. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14551638. Epub 2014 Oct 28.