TY - JOUR
T1 - Development and psychometric properties of a brief measure of subjective decision quality for breast cancer treatment
AU - Resnicow, Ken
AU - Abrahamse, Paul
AU - Tocco, Rachel S.
AU - Hawley, Sarah
AU - Griggs, Jennifer
AU - Janz, Nancy
AU - Fagerlin, Angela
AU - Wilson, Adrienne
AU - Ward, Kevin C.
AU - Gabram, Sheryl G.A.
AU - Katz, Steven
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Resnicow et al.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Background: Breast cancer patients face several preference-sensitive treatment decisions. Feelings such as regret or having had inadequate information about these decisions can significantly alter patient perceptions of recovery and recurrence. Numerous objective measures of decision quality (e.g., knowledge assessments, values concordance measures) have been developed; there are far fewer measures of subjective decision quality and little consensus regarding how the construct should be assessed. The current study explores the psychometric properties of a new subjective quality decision measure for breast cancer treatment that could be used for other preference sensitive decisions. Methods: 320 women aged 20-79 diagnosed with AJCC stage 0 - III breast cancer were surveyed at two cancer specialty centers. Decision quality was assessed with single items representing six dimensions: regret, satisfaction, and fit as well as perceived adequacy of information, time, and involvement. Women rated decision quality for their overall treatment experience and surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decisions separately. Principle components was used to explore factor structure. After scales were formed, internal consistency was computed using Cronbach's alpha. The association of each of the four final scales with patient characteristics scores was examined by Pearson correlation. Results: For overall breast cancer treatment as well as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decisions, the six items yielded a single factor solution. Factor loadings of the six decision items were all above .45 across the overall and treatment-specific scales, with the exception of "Right for You" for chemotherapy and radiation. Internal consistency was 0.77, 0.85, 0.82, and 0.78 for the overall, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decision quality scales, respectively. Conclusions: Our measure of subjective appraisal of breast cancer treatment decisions includes 5 related elements; regret and satisfaction as well as perceived adequacy of information, time, and involvement. Future research is needed to establish norms for the measure as is further psychometric testing, particularly to examine how it is associated with outcomes such as quality of life, psychological coping and objective decision quality.
AB - Background: Breast cancer patients face several preference-sensitive treatment decisions. Feelings such as regret or having had inadequate information about these decisions can significantly alter patient perceptions of recovery and recurrence. Numerous objective measures of decision quality (e.g., knowledge assessments, values concordance measures) have been developed; there are far fewer measures of subjective decision quality and little consensus regarding how the construct should be assessed. The current study explores the psychometric properties of a new subjective quality decision measure for breast cancer treatment that could be used for other preference sensitive decisions. Methods: 320 women aged 20-79 diagnosed with AJCC stage 0 - III breast cancer were surveyed at two cancer specialty centers. Decision quality was assessed with single items representing six dimensions: regret, satisfaction, and fit as well as perceived adequacy of information, time, and involvement. Women rated decision quality for their overall treatment experience and surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decisions separately. Principle components was used to explore factor structure. After scales were formed, internal consistency was computed using Cronbach's alpha. The association of each of the four final scales with patient characteristics scores was examined by Pearson correlation. Results: For overall breast cancer treatment as well as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decisions, the six items yielded a single factor solution. Factor loadings of the six decision items were all above .45 across the overall and treatment-specific scales, with the exception of "Right for You" for chemotherapy and radiation. Internal consistency was 0.77, 0.85, 0.82, and 0.78 for the overall, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation decision quality scales, respectively. Conclusions: Our measure of subjective appraisal of breast cancer treatment decisions includes 5 related elements; regret and satisfaction as well as perceived adequacy of information, time, and involvement. Future research is needed to establish norms for the measure as is further psychometric testing, particularly to examine how it is associated with outcomes such as quality of life, psychological coping and objective decision quality.
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Decision making
KW - Decision quality
KW - Decision satisfaction
KW - Oncology
KW - Psychometric testing
KW - Scale development
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84964313252
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84964313252#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1186/s12911-014-0110-x
DO - 10.1186/s12911-014-0110-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 25476986
AN - SCOPUS:84964313252
SN - 1472-6947
VL - 14
JO - BMC medical informatics and decision making
JF - BMC medical informatics and decision making
IS - 1
M1 - 110
ER -