Sigl Hannah, Kriston Levente, Scholl Isabelle, Härter Martin, Hahlweg Pola
Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2025 May 3;15(1):15479. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-99640-2.
The patient-reported, psychometrically evaluated, and frequently used 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) assesses shared decision-making processes in medical encounters. This study aimed to investigate SDM-Q-9's response process validity from the perspective of patients with cancer. We conducted qualitative cognitive interviews with N = 11 patients of a German comprehensive cancer center. Participants described their item interpretations, content anchors for highest and lowest scores, and difficulties with item rating. We performed qualitative content analysis and assessed concordance between item interpretations and the underlying theoretical construct of SDM-Q-9. Participants reported it necessary to have a choice (i.e., awareness of more than one option) to answer SDM-Q-9 and had difficulties rating one specific medical encounter only. For most items, interpretations matched the underlying theoretical construct. Discordance was found for item 2 (sharing the decision), and partial discordance for items 5 (supporting comprehension) and 6 (eliciting preferences). Content anchors for highest and lowest ratings showed substantial inter-individual variance. Results regarding SDM-Q-9's response process validity suggest validity for most items. However, reported prerequisites to be able to answer SDM-Q-9 and discordance between the underlying theoretical construct and interpretations found for three items warrant further investigation, before revision of the measure should be considered.
患者报告的、经过心理测量评估且常用的9项共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)评估医疗问诊中的共同决策过程。本研究旨在从癌症患者的角度调查SDM-Q-9的反应过程效度。我们对德国一家综合癌症中心的11名患者进行了定性认知访谈。参与者描述了他们对题项的理解、最高分和最低分的内容锚定以及题项评分的困难。我们进行了定性内容分析,并评估了题项理解与SDM-Q-9潜在理论结构之间的一致性。参与者报告称,回答SDM-Q-9需要有选择(即意识到不止一个选项),并且仅对一次特定的医疗问诊进行评分存在困难。对于大多数题项,理解与潜在理论结构相符。在题项2(共享决策)上发现不一致,在题项5(支持理解)和题项6(引出偏好)上发现部分不一致。最高分和最低分的内容锚定显示出个体间的显著差异。关于SDM-Q-9反应过程效度的结果表明大多数题项有效。然而,报告的回答SDM-Q-9的先决条件以及在三个题项中发现的潜在理论结构与理解之间的不一致,在考虑修订该量表之前值得进一步研究。