↓ Skip to main content

Psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire for shared decision-making in multiple sclerosis: item response theory modelling and confirmatory factor analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire for shared decision-making in multiple sclerosis: item response theory modelling and confirmatory factor analysis
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0656-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Javier Ballesteros, Ester Moral, Luis Brieva, Elena Ruiz-Beato, Daniel Prefasi, Jorge Maurino

Abstract

Shared decision-making is a cornerstone of patient-centred care. The 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) is a brief self-assessment tool for measuring patients' perceived level of involvement in decision-making related to their own treatment and care. Information related to the psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of the items composing the SDM-Q-9 and its dimensional structure in patients with relapsing-remitting MS. A non-interventional, cross-sectional study in adult patients with relapsing-remitting MS was conducted in 17 MS units throughout Spain. A nonparametric item response theory (IRT) analysis was used to assess the latent construct and dimensional structure underlying the observed responses. A parametric IRT model, General Partial Credit Model, was fitted to obtain estimates of the relationship between the latent construct and item characteristics. The unidimensionality of the SDM-Q-9 instrument was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis. A total of 221 patients were studied (mean age = 42.1 ± 9.9 years, 68.3% female). Median Expanded Disability Status Scale score was 2.5 ± 1.5. Most patients reported taking part in each step of the decision-making process. Internal reliability of the instrument was high (Cronbach's α = 0.91) and the overall scale scalability score was 0.57, indicative of a strong scale. All items, except for the item 1, showed scalability indices higher than 0.30. Four items (items 6 through to 9) conveyed more than half of the SDM-Q-9 overall information (67.3%). The SDM-Q-9 was a good fit for a unidimensional latent structure (comparative fit index = 0.98, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.07). All freely estimated parameters were statistically significant (P < 0.001). All items presented standardized parameter estimates with salient loadings (>0.40) with the exception of item 1 which presented the lowest loading (0.26). Items 6 through to 8 were the most relevant items for shared decision-making. The SDM-Q-9 presents appropriate psychometric properties and is therefore useful for assessing different aspects of shared decision-making in patients with multiple sclerosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Ecuador 1 1%
Unknown 84 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Master 8 9%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Psychology 8 9%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 23 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,341,817
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,177
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,523
of 309,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#32
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.