OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which family physicians (FPs) involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome. METHODS: Based on transcripts of consultations between 41 FPs and 128 women, two raters independently assessed clinician's efforts to involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome using the French-language version of OPTION. Descriptive statistics of OPTION scores were calculated. Construct validity was assessed by performing a principal factor analysis and by measuring association with consultation duration and FPs sociodemograhics. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha and inter-rater reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The overall mean OPTION score was low: 19 +/- 7 (range = 0 [no involvement] to 100 [high involvement]). One factor accounted for 80% of the variance. Both internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were very good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.73; ICC = 0.76). OPTION scores were lower for residents than for licensed FPs (17 +/- 5 vs 21 +/- 4; p = 0.02) and were positively associated with duration of consultation (r = 0.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on the French-language version of OPTION, which showed satisfactory psychometric properties, FPs studied put minimal efforts to involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome. (c) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which family physicians (FPs) involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome. METHODS: Based on transcripts of consultations between 41 FPs and 128 women, two raters independently assessed clinician's efforts to involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome using the French-language version of OPTION. Descriptive statistics of OPTION scores were calculated. Construct validity was assessed by performing a principal factor analysis and by measuring association with consultation duration and FPs sociodemograhics. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha and inter-rater reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The overall mean OPTION score was low: 19 +/- 7 (range = 0 [no involvement] to 100 [high involvement]). One factor accounted for 80% of the variance. Both internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were very good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.73; ICC = 0.76). OPTION scores were lower for residents than for licensed FPs (17 +/- 5 vs 21 +/- 4; p = 0.02) and were positively associated with duration of consultation (r = 0.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on the French-language version of OPTION, which showed satisfactory psychometric properties, FPs studied put minimal efforts to involve women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome. (c) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: France Légaré; Stéphane Turcotte; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Ratté; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham Journal: Patient Date: 2012 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: William B Brinkman; Jessica Hartl; Lauren M Rawe; Heidi Sucharew; Maria T Britto; Jeffery N Epstein Journal: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Date: 2011-11
Authors: France Légaré; Dawn Stacey; Nathalie Brière; Sophie Desroches; Serge Dumont; Kimberley Fraser; Mary-Anne Murray; Anne Sales; Denise Aubé Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: William B Brinkman; Jessica Hartl Majcher; Lauren M Poling; Gaoyan Shi; Mike Zender; Heidi Sucharew; Maria T Britto; Jeffery N Epstein Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2013-05-10