VALIDATION OF A DECISIONAL CONFLICT SCALE

VALIDATION OF A DECISIONAL CONFLICT SCALE
复制标题

DOI:
10.1177/0272989x9501500105
复制
发表时间:
1995-01-01
影响因子:
3.6
通讯作者:
OCONNOR, AM
OCONNOR, AM
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
OCONNOR, AM

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

研究目的是评估决策冲突量表 (DCS) 的心理测量特性,该量表引发:1) 医疗保健消费者在做出健康相关决策时的不确定性; 2)造成不确定性的因素; 3) 医疗保健消费者感知到的有效决策。 DCS 的开发是为了应对缺乏可用于评估医疗保健消费者决策辅助工具并根据特定消费者需求定制决策支持干预措施的工具。 该量表由 909 名决定流感免疫或乳腺癌筛查的个体进行了评估。 两周后对受访者的子样本进行了重新测试。 重测信度系数为0.81。 内部一致性系数范围为0.78至0.92。 DCS 在那些有强烈意愿接受或拒绝接受流感疫苗或乳腺癌筛查邀请的人和那些意图不确定的人之间存在显着差异(p < 0.0002)。 该量表还显着区分了接受或拒绝免疫接种的人和延迟决定免疫的人(p < 0.0002)。 DCS 和知识测试分数之间存在弱负相关(r = -0.16,p < 0.05)。 量表的心理测量特性是可以接受的。 这是可行且易于管理的。 有必要评估对变革的响应能力并验证更困难的决策。
The study objective was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a decisional conflict scale (DCS) that elicits: 1) health-care consumers' uncertainty in making a health-related decision; 2) the factors contributing to the uncertainty; and 3) health-care consumers' perceived effective decision making. The DCS was developed in response to the lack of instruments available to evaluate health-care-consumer decision aids and to tailor decision-supporting interventions to particular consumer needs. The scale was evaluated with 909 individuals deciding about influenza immunization or breast cancer screening. A subsample of respondents was retested two weeks later. The test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.81. Internal consistency coefficients ranged from 0.78 to 0.92. The DCS discriminated significantly (p < 0.0002) between those who had strong intentions either to accept or to decline invitations to receive influenza vaccine or breast cancer screening and those whose intentions were uncertain. The scale also discriminated significantly (p < 0.0002) between those who accepted or rejected immunization and those who delayed their decisions to be immunized. There was a weak inverse correlation (r = -0.16, p < 0.05) between the DCS and knowledge test scores. The psychometric properties of the scale are acceptable. It is feasible and easy to administer. Evaluations of responsiveness to change and validation with more difficult decisions are warranted.