Richard Huan Xu1, Ling Ming Zhou2, Eliza Laiyi Wong1, Dong Wang2, Jing Hui Chang2. 1. Centre for Health Systems and Policy Research, Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 2. School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the decision regret scale (DRSc). METHODS: The data of 704 patients who completed the DRSc were used for the analyses. We evaluated the construct, convergent/discriminant, and known-group validity; internal consistency and test-retest reliability; and the item invariance of the DRSc. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was employed to confirm the optimal cutoff point of the scale. RESULTS: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that a one-factor model fits the data. The internal consistency (α = 0.74) and test-retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.71] of the DRSc were acceptable. The DRSc demonstrated unidimensionality and invariance for use across the sexes. It was confirmed that an optimal cutoff point of 25 could discriminate between patients with high and low decisional regret during clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The DRSc is a parsimonious instrument that can be used to measure the uncertainty inherent in medical decisions. It can be employed to provide knowledge, offer support, and elicit patient preferences in an attempt to promote shared decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the decision regret scale (DRSc). METHODS: The data of 704 patients who completed the DRSc were used for the analyses. We evaluated the construct, convergent/discriminant, and known-group validity; internal consistency and test-retest reliability; and the item invariance of the DRSc. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was employed to confirm the optimal cutoff point of the scale. RESULTS: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that a one-factor model fits the data. The internal consistency (α = 0.74) and test-retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.71] of the DRSc were acceptable. The DRSc demonstrated unidimensionality and invariance for use across the sexes. It was confirmed that an optimal cutoff point of 25 could discriminate between patients with high and low decisional regret during clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The DRSc is a parsimonious instrument that can be used to measure the uncertainty inherent in medical decisions. It can be employed to provide knowledge, offer support, and elicit patient preferences in an attempt to promote shared decision-making.
Authors: Kristen E Pecanac; Roger L Brown; Jay Steingrub; Wendy Anderson; Michael A Matthay; Douglas B White Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2018-07-07