Using Standardized Videos to Examine the Validity of the Shared Decision Making Process Scale: Results of a Randomized Online Experiment
- PMID: 34344233
- PMCID: PMC8633028
- DOI: 10.1177/0272989X211029267
Using Standardized Videos to Examine the Validity of the Shared Decision Making Process Scale: Results of a Randomized Online Experiment
Abstract
Background: The Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process scale is a brief, patient-reported measure of SDM with demonstrated validity in surgical decision making studies. Herein we examine the validity of the scores in assessing SDM for cancer screening and medication decisions through standardized videos of good-quality and poor-quality SDM consultations.
Method: An online sample was randomized to a clinical decision-colon cancer screening or high cholesterol-and a viewing order-good-quality video first or poor-quality video first. Participants watched both videos, completing a survey after each video. Surveys included the SDM Process scale and the 9-item SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9); higher scores indicated greater SDM. Multilevel linear regressions identified if video, order, or their interaction predicted SDM Process scores. To identify how the SDM Process score classified videos, area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. The correlation between SDM Process score and SDM-Q-9 assessed construct validity. Heterogeneity analyses were conducted.
Results: In the sample of 388 participants (68% white, 70% female, average age 45 years) good-quality videos received higher SDM Process scores than poor-quality videos (Ps < 0.001), and those who viewed the good-quality high cholesterol video first tended to rate the videos higher. SDM Process scores were related to SDM-Q-9 scores (rs > 0.58; Ps < 0.001). AUC was poor (0.69) for the high cholesterol model and fair (0.79) for the colorectal cancer model. Heterogeneity analyses suggested individual differences were predictive of SDM Process scores.
Conclusion: SDM Process scores showed good evidence of validity in a hypothetical scenario but were lacking in ability to classify good-quality or poor-quality videos accurately. Considerable heterogeneity of scoring existed, suggesting that individual differences played a role in evaluating good- or poor-quality SDM conversations.
Keywords: measurement; shared decision making; validity.
Similar articles
-
Validity and reliability of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a national survey in Hungary.Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Jun;20(Suppl 1):43-55. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01061-2. Epub 2019 May 20. Eur J Health Econ. 2019. PMID: 31111402 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of the shared decision-making process scale in cancer screening and medication decisions.Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Mar;108:107617. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.107617. Epub 2022 Dec 23. Patient Educ Couns. 2023. PMID: 36593166
-
Comparing the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to the OPTION Scale - an attempt to establish convergent validity.Health Expect. 2015 Feb;18(1):137-50. doi: 10.1111/hex.12022. Epub 2012 Nov 26. Health Expect. 2015. PMID: 23176071 Free PMC article.
-
Use of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc) in intervention studies-A systematic review.PLoS One. 2017 Mar 30;12(3):e0173904. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173904. eCollection 2017. PLoS One. 2017. PMID: 28358864 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Patient readiness for shared decision making about treatment: Conceptualisation and development of the ReadySDM.Health Expect. 2024 Apr;27(2):e13995. doi: 10.1111/hex.13995. Health Expect. 2024. PMID: 38400633 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of a Peer Comparison and Educational Intervention on Medical Test Conversation Quality: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Nov 1;6(11):e2342464. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.42464. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. PMID: 37943557 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Improving the Process of Shared Decision-Making by Integrating Online Structured Information and Self-Assessment Tools.J Pers Med. 2022 Feb 10;12(2):256. doi: 10.3390/jpm12020256. J Pers Med. 2022. PMID: 35207744 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Fagerlin A, Sepucha KR, Couper MP, Levin CA, Singer E, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Patients’ knowledge about 9 common health conditions: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(5_suppl):35–52. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
