Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids
| Autor: | Karen Sepucha, Jesse Jansen, Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby, Logan Trenaman, K. D. Valentine, Daniel D. Matlock, Richard Thomson, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Pérez, Mirjam Körner, Mary E. Ropka, Christine Stirling, Ha Vo, Joanne Lally, Celia E. Wills |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | RS: CAPHRI - R6 - Promoting Health & Personalised Care, Family Medicine |
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Psychometrics Concordance shared decision making Decision quality Reviews checklist/standards VALIDATION law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Randomized controlled trial law Decision aids medicine Humans Medical physics 030212 general & internal medicine patient decision aids Reliability (statistics) Quality Indicators Health Care Interpretability decision support techniques 030503 health policy & services Health Policy Reproducibility of Results RANDOMIZED-TRIAL Checklist Critical appraisal patient-centred care standards Patient Participation 0305 other medical science Psychology checklist |
| Zdroj: | Medical Decision Making Medical Decision Making, 41(7):0272989X211011120, 954-959. SAGE Publications Inc. |
| ISSN: | 1552-681X 0272-989X |
| Popis: | Background In 2014, a systematic review found large gaps in the quality of reporting of measures used in 86 published trials evaluating the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs). The purpose of this study was to update that review. Methods We examined measures of decision making used in 49 randomized controlled trials included in the 2014 and 2017 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 paired reviewers. Results Information from 273 measures was abstracted, and 109 of these covered the core domains of decision processes ( n = 55) and decision quality including informed choice/knowledge ( n = 48) and values-choice concordance ( n = 12). Very few studies reported data on the performance and clinical sensibility of measures, with reliability (23%) and validity (6%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance compared with previously published measures. Limitations The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications. Conclusion There continues to be very little reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards have been published, and efforts to require investigators to use them are needed. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|