Literature DB >> 15893210

The decision evaluation scales.

Peep F M Stalmeier1, Marielle S Roosmalen, Lia C G Verhoef, Josette E H M Hoekstra-Weebers, Jan C Oosterwijk, Ute Moog, Nicoline Hoogerbrugge, Willem A J van Daal.   

Abstract

There are several instruments to assess how patients evaluate their medical treatment choice. These are used to evaluate decision aids. Our objective is to investigate which psychological factors play a role when patients evaluate their medical treatment choices. A pool of 36 items was constructed, covering concepts such as uncertainty about and satisfaction with the decision, informed choice, effective decision making, responsibility for the decision, perceived riskiness of the choice, and social support regarding the decision. This pool was presented to patients at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer, awaiting a genetic test result, and facing the choice between prophylactic surgery or screening. Additional measures were assessed for validation purposes. Factor and Rasch analyses were used for factor and item selection. Construct validity of emerging scales was assessed by relating them with the additional measures. Three factors summarised the psychological factors concerning decision evaluation: Satisfaction-Uncertainty, Informed Choice, and Decision Control. Reliabilities (Cronbach's alpha) of the three scales were 0.79, 0.85, and 0.75, respectively. Construct validity hypotheses were confirmed. The first two scales were similar to previously developed scales. Of these three scales, the Decision Control scale correlated most strongly with the well-being measures, was associated with partner's agreement and physician's preferences as perceived by patients, and with a negative emotional reaction to the information material. In conclusion, the Decision Control scale is a new scale to evaluate decision aids, and it appears to be rooted in health psychological theories.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15893210     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.07.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  17 in total

1.  Assessment of psychosocial outcomes in genetic counseling research: an overview of available measurement scales.

Authors:  Nadine A Kasparian; Claire E Wakefield; Bettina Meiser
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-08-13       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Does a decision aid for prostate cancer affect different aspects of decisional regret, assessed with new regret scales? A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Julia J van Tol-Geerdink; Jan Willem H Leer; Carl J Wijburg; Inge M van Oort; Henk Vergunst; Emile J van Lin; J Alfred Witjes; Peep F M Stalmeier
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2015-05-03       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Cross-cultural validation of the Decisional Conflict Scale in a sample of French patients.

Authors:  Julien Mancini; Gaëlle Santin; Françoise Chabal; Claire Julian-Reynier
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  A review of surgical informed consent: past, present, and future. A quest to help patients make better decisions.

Authors:  Wouter K G Leclercq; Bram J Keulers; Marc R M Scheltinga; Paul H M Spauwen; Gert-Jan van der Wilt
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  The effect of a multifaceted empowerment strategy on decision making about the number of embryos transferred in in vitro fertilisation: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Arno van Peperstraten; Willianne Nelen; Richard Grol; Gerhard Zielhuis; Eddy Adang; Peep Stalmeier; Rosella Hermens; Jan Kremer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-09-30

6.  Design and efficacy of a multilingual, multicultural HPV vaccine education intervention.

Authors:  Armando Valdez; Susan L Stewart; Sora Park Tanjasiri; Vivian Levy; Alvaro Garza
Journal:  J Commun Healthc       Date:  2015-07-08

7.  Factors associated with the receipt of fertility preservation services along the decision-making pathway in young Canadian female cancer patients.

Authors:  Samantha Yee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Assessing the quality of decision-making for planned oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Samantha Yee; Carly V Goodman; Vivian Fu; Nechama J Lipton; Michal Dviri; Jordana Mashiach; Clifford L Librach
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Filling a void: thyroid cancer surgery information on the internet.

Authors:  Heather Yeo; Sanziana Roman; Mamie Air; Christina Maser; Tara Trapasso; Barbara Kinder; Julie Ann Sosa
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.282

10.  Fertility counseling information adequacy as a moderator of regret among adolescent and young adult breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Angela G Campbell; Marianne Hillemeier
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2020-09-26       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.