• 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

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。

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

机构信息

Department of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, Budapest, 1093, Hungary.

Premium Postdoctoral Research Programme, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Nádor u. 7, Budapest, 1051, Hungary.

出版信息

Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Jun;20(Suppl 1):43-55. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01061-2. Epub 2019 May 20.

DOI:10.1007/s10198-019-01061-2
PMID:31111402
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6544590/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) is one of the most frequently applied instruments for assessing patients' involvement in medical decision-making. Our objectives were to develop a Hungarian version of SDM-Q-9, to evaluate its psychometric properties and to compare its performance between primary and specialised care settings.

METHODS

In 2019, a sample of adults (n = 537) representative of the Hungarian general population in terms of age, gender and geographic region completed an online survey with respect to a recent health-related decision. Outcome measures included SDM-Q-9 and Control Preferences Scale-post (CPS). Item characteristics, internal consistency reliability and the factor structure of SDM-Q-9 were determined.

RESULTS

The overall ceiling and floor effects for SDM-Q-9 total scores were 12.3% and 2.2%, respectively. An excellent internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.925) was demonstrated. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a one-factor model explaining 63.5% of the variance of SDM-Q-9. A confirmatory factor analysis supported the acceptability of this model. Known-groups validity was confirmed with CPS categories; mean SDM-Q-9 total scores were higher in the 'Shared decision' category (72.6) compared to both 'Physician decided' (55.1, p = 0.0002) and 'Patient decided' (57.2, p = 0.0086) categories. In most aspects of validity and reliability, there was no statistically significant difference between primary and specialised care.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall good measurement properties of the Hungarian SDM-Q-9 make the questionnaire suitable for use in both primary and specialised care settings. SDM-Q-9 may be useful for health policies targeting the implementation of shared decision-making and aiming to improve efficiency and quality of care in Hungary.

摘要

背景

九项共享决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)是评估患者参与医疗决策的最常用工具之一。我们的目标是开发匈牙利语版本的 SDM-Q-9,评估其心理测量特性,并比较其在初级保健和专科保健环境中的表现。

方法

2019 年,一个代表匈牙利一般人群在年龄、性别和地理区域方面的成年人样本(n=537)完成了一项关于最近一次与健康相关的决策的在线调查。结果测量包括 SDM-Q-9 和控制偏好量表后(CPS)。确定了 SDM-Q-9 的项目特征、内部一致性信度和因子结构。

结果

SDM-Q-9 总分的总天花板和地板效应分别为 12.3%和 2.2%。显示出极好的内部一致性信度(Cronbach's alpha 0.925)。探索性因子分析得出的一个因素模型解释了 SDM-Q-9 变异的 63.5%。验证性因子分析支持该模型的可接受性。与 CPS 类别证实了已知组有效性;SDM-Q-9 总分在“共同决策”类别(72.6)中高于“医生决策”(55.1,p=0.0002)和“患者决策”(57.2,p=0.0086)类别。在有效性和可靠性的大多数方面,初级保健和专科保健之间没有统计学上的显著差异。

结论

匈牙利语 SDM-Q-9 的总体良好测量特性使其适用于初级保健和专科保健环境。SDM-Q-9 可能对旨在实施共享决策并旨在提高匈牙利医疗保健效率和质量的卫生政策有用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/2d95babb13bb/10198_2019_1061_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/1c1e8f84ac9d/10198_2019_1061_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/3d5743d9e2bb/10198_2019_1061_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/2d95babb13bb/10198_2019_1061_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/1c1e8f84ac9d/10198_2019_1061_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/3d5743d9e2bb/10198_2019_1061_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/260d/6544590/2d95babb13bb/10198_2019_1061_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
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.
2
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.
3
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.
4
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.
5
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.
6
Development and psychometric properties of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire--physician version (SDM-Q-Doc).共享决策问卷-医师版(SDM-Q-Doc)的制定和心理测量特性。
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Aug;88(2):284-90. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.03.005. Epub 2012 Apr 3.
7
Association between physicians' and patients' perspectives of shared decision making in primary care settings in Japan: The impact of environmental factors.日本初级保健环境中医生和患者对共同决策的看法之间的关联:环境因素的影响。
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 10;16(2):e0246518. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246518. eCollection 2021.
8
The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample.9 项共享决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)。在初级保健样本中的开发和心理测量特性。
Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Jul;80(1):94-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.034. Epub 2009 Oct 30.
9
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.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric Validation and Reliability of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: A Systematic Review.9项共同决策问卷的心理测量学验证与信度:一项系统评价。
Iran J Public Health. 2025 Jun;54(6):1179-1192. doi: 10.18502/ijph.v54i6.18896.
2
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.丹麦用于盆底功能障碍和腰痛患者共同决策的SDM-Q-9问卷的心理测量特性:项目反应理论建模
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025 May 19;25(1):194. doi: 10.1186/s12911-025-03023-6.
3
Population norms for the EQ-5D-5L for Hungary: comparison of online surveys and computer assisted personal interviews.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of the concept of patient-centredness - A systematic review.以患者为中心理念的发展 - 系统评价。
Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Jul;102(7):1228-1236. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.023. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
2
Romanian version of SDM-Q-9 validation in Internal Medicine and Cardiology setting: a multicentric cross-sectional study.《内科和心脏病学环境中SDM-Q-9验证的罗马尼亚语版本:一项多中心横断面研究》
Rom J Intern Med. 2019 Jun 1;57(2):195-200. doi: 10.2478/rjim-2019-0002.
3
Spanish validation endorsement of SDM-Q-9, a new approach.
匈牙利EQ-5D-5L量表的人群常模:在线调查与计算机辅助个人访谈的比较
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Feb 21. doi: 10.1007/s10198-024-01755-2.
4
Communicative health literacy with physicians in healthcare services- results of a Hungarian nationwide survey.医疗服务中与医生的沟通健康素养——匈牙利全国性调查结果
BMC Public Health. 2025 Jan 30;25(1):390. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21590-1.
5
Developing and Evaluating SEE-Diabetes: A Patient-Centered Educational Decision Support System for Diabetes Care.开发和评估 SEE-Diabetes:一种面向糖尿病护理的以患者为中心的教育决策支持系统。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2025 Feb;31(1):e14234. doi: 10.1111/jep.14234. Epub 2024 Nov 4.
6
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.
7
Analysis of factors that promote the participation of patients with chronic diseases in shared decision making on medication: a cross-sectional survey in Hubei Province, China.分析促进慢性病患者参与药物治疗共享决策的因素:中国湖北省的横断面调查。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Dec 6;23(1):2440. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-17099-0.
8
Women's Involvement in Decision-Making and Associated Factors Among Women Who Underwent a Caesarean Section in Sidama Region, South Ethiopia: Cross-Sectional Study.埃塞俄比亚南部锡达马地区剖宫产妇女的决策参与情况及相关因素:横断面研究
Int J Womens Health. 2023 May 25;15:813-824. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S399261. eCollection 2023.
9
Is shared decision-making a determinant of polypharmacy in older patients with chronic disease? A cross-sectional study in Hubei Province, China.共决策是否是慢性病老年患者多重用药的决定因素?来自中国湖北省的一项横断面研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2023 Apr 29;23(1):258. doi: 10.1186/s12877-023-03968-1.
10
Shared Decision Making for Choosing renAl Replacement Therapy in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients (SDM-ART trial): study protocol for randomized clinical trial.慢性肾脏病患者选择肾脏替代治疗的共同决策(SDM-ART试验):随机临床试验研究方案
Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2023 Nov;42(6):751-761. doi: 10.23876/j.krcp.22.019. Epub 2023 Apr 14.
SDM-Q-9 的西班牙语验证认可,一种新方法。
BMC Public Health. 2019 Jan 23;19(1):106. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6436-7.
4
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.
5
Shared decision making in pharmacotherapy decisions, perceived by patients with bipolar disorder.双相情感障碍患者所感知的药物治疗决策中的共同决策。
Int J Bipolar Disord. 2018 Oct 4;6(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s40345-018-0129-5.
6
Shared decision-making in older patients with colorectal or pancreatic cancer: Determinants of patients' and observers' perceptions.老年结直肠癌或胰腺癌患者的共同决策:患者和观察者感知的决定因素。
Patient Educ Couns. 2018 Oct;101(10):1767-1774. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.06.005. Epub 2018 Jun 13.
7
Shared decision making between patient and GP about referrals from primary care: Does gatekeeping make a difference?医患共同决策在初级保健转诊中的应用:守门人制度有影响吗?
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 11;13(6):e0198729. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198729. eCollection 2018.
8
Rasch Analysis of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire in Women With Breast Cancer.乳腺癌女性患者 9 项共享决策问卷的 Rasch 分析。
Cancer Nurs. 2019 May/Jun;42(3):E34-E42. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000607.
9
The quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision making: A systematic review.评估共同决策过程的工具质量:一项系统综述。
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 15;13(2):e0191747. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191747. eCollection 2018.
10
Factors associated with shared decision making among primary care physicians: Findings from a multicentre cross-sectional study.与初级保健医生共同决策相关的因素:一项多中心横断面研究的结果。
Health Expect. 2018 Feb;21(1):212-221. doi: 10.1111/hex.12603. Epub 2017 Aug 2.