Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting

Babak Nejati; Chien Chin Lin; Vida Imani; Maria Browall; Chung Ying Lin; Anders Broström; Amir H. Pakpour

doi:10.15171/hpp.2019.15

Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting

Babak Nejati, Chien Chin Lin, Vida Imani, Maria Browall, Chung Ying Lin (Corresponding Author), Anders Broström, Amir H. Pakpour

Research output: Journal article publication › Journal article › Academic research › peer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) using comprehensive and thorough psychometric methods in an oncology setting. Methods: Cancer survivors (n = 1783; 928 [52.05%] males) and physicians (n=154; 121 [78.58%] males) participated in this study. Each cancer survivor completed the SDM-Q-9. Physicians completed the SDM-Q-Doc for each of their cancer patient. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch model were used to test the psychometric properties of SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. Results: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrated unidimensional structure in CFA and Rasch model. In addition, the measurement invariance was supported for both SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc across sex using the multigroup CFA. Rash analysis indicates no differential item functioning (DIF)across sex for all the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc items. SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc were moderately correlated (r = 0.41; P< 0.001). Conclusion: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc are valid instruments to assess shared decision making in the oncology setting.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	105-114
Number of pages	10
Journal	Health Promotion Perspectives
Volume	9
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.15171/hpp.2019.15
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2019

Keywords

Cancer
Confirmatory factor analysis
Instrumental study
Rasch

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Health(social science)
Education
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

More information

10.15171/hpp.2019.15

http://hdl.handle.net/10397/81121

Cite this

@article{547030881bd9453aa7e476163dd9e477,

title = "Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting",

abstract = "Background: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) using comprehensive and thorough psychometric methods in an oncology setting. Methods: Cancer survivors (n = 1783; 928 [52.05%] males) and physicians (n=154; 121 [78.58%] males) participated in this study. Each cancer survivor completed the SDM-Q-9. Physicians completed the SDM-Q-Doc for each of their cancer patient. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch model were used to test the psychometric properties of SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. Results: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrated unidimensional structure in CFA and Rasch model. In addition, the measurement invariance was supported for both SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc across sex using the multigroup CFA. Rash analysis indicates no differential item functioning (DIF)across sex for all the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc items. SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc were moderately correlated (r = 0.41; P< 0.001). Conclusion: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc are valid instruments to assess shared decision making in the oncology setting.",

keywords = "Cancer, Confirmatory factor analysis, Instrumental study, Rasch",

author = "Babak Nejati and Lin, {Chien Chin} and Vida Imani and Maria Browall and Lin, {Chung Ying} and Anders Brostr{\"o}m and Pakpour, {Amir H.}",

year = "2019",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.15171/hpp.2019.15",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

pages = "105--114",

journal = "Health Promotion Perspectives",

issn = "2228-6497",

publisher = "Tabriz University of Medical Sciences",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting

AU - Nejati, Babak

AU - Lin, Chien Chin

AU - Imani, Vida

AU - Browall, Maria

AU - Lin, Chung Ying

AU - Broström, Anders

AU - Pakpour, Amir H.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) using comprehensive and thorough psychometric methods in an oncology setting. Methods: Cancer survivors (n = 1783; 928 [52.05%] males) and physicians (n=154; 121 [78.58%] males) participated in this study. Each cancer survivor completed the SDM-Q-9. Physicians completed the SDM-Q-Doc for each of their cancer patient. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch model were used to test the psychometric properties of SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. Results: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrated unidimensional structure in CFA and Rasch model. In addition, the measurement invariance was supported for both SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc across sex using the multigroup CFA. Rash analysis indicates no differential item functioning (DIF)across sex for all the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc items. SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc were moderately correlated (r = 0.41; P< 0.001). Conclusion: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc are valid instruments to assess shared decision making in the oncology setting.

AB - Background: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the 9-Item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) using comprehensive and thorough psychometric methods in an oncology setting. Methods: Cancer survivors (n = 1783; 928 [52.05%] males) and physicians (n=154; 121 [78.58%] males) participated in this study. Each cancer survivor completed the SDM-Q-9. Physicians completed the SDM-Q-Doc for each of their cancer patient. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch model were used to test the psychometric properties of SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. Results: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc demonstrated unidimensional structure in CFA and Rasch model. In addition, the measurement invariance was supported for both SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc across sex using the multigroup CFA. Rash analysis indicates no differential item functioning (DIF)across sex for all the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc items. SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc were moderately correlated (r = 0.41; P< 0.001). Conclusion: SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc are valid instruments to assess shared decision making in the oncology setting.

KW - Cancer

KW - Confirmatory factor analysis

KW - Instrumental study

KW - Rasch

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066879481&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.15171/hpp.2019.15

DO - 10.15171/hpp.2019.15

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85066879481

SN - 2228-6497

VL - 9

SP - 105

EP - 114

JO - Health Promotion Perspectives

JF - Health Promotion Perspectives

IS - 2

ER -

Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

More information

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this