Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jan 3;16(1):e2.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.3085.

The psychometric properties of CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of the shared decision-making process

Paul James Barr  1 , Rachel Thompson, Thom Walsh, Stuart W Grande, Elissa M Ozanne, Glyn Elwyn
Affiliations

The psychometric properties of CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of the shared decision-making process

Paul James Barr et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Patient-centered health care is a central component of current health policy agendas. Shared decision making (SDM) is considered to be the pinnacle of patient engagement and methods to promote this are becoming commonplace. However, the measurement of SDM continues to prove challenging. Reviews have highlighted the need for a patient-reported measure of SDM that is practical, valid, and reliable to assist implementation efforts. In consultation with patients, we developed CollaboRATE, a 3-item measure of the SDM process.

Objective: There is a need for scalable patient-reported measure of the SDM process. In the current project, we assessed the psychometric properties of CollaboRATE.

Methods: A representative sample of the US population were recruited online and were randomly allocated to view 1 of 6 simulated doctor-patient encounters in January 2013. Three dimensions of SDM were manipulated in the encounters: (1) explanation of the health issue, (2) elicitation of patient preferences, and (3) integration of patient preferences. Participants then completed CollaboRATE (possible scores 0-100) in addition to 2 other patient-reported measures of SDM: the 9-item Shared Decision Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the Doctor Facilitation subscale of the Patient's Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS). A subsample of participants was resurveyed between 7 and 14 days after the initial survey. We assessed CollaboRATE's discriminative, concurrent, and divergent validity, intrarater reliability, and sensitivity to change.

Results: The final sample consisted of 1341 participants. CollaboRATE demonstrated discriminative validity, with a significant increase in CollaboRATE score as the number of core dimensions of SDM increased from zero (mean score: 46.0, 95% CI 42.4-49.6) to 3 (mean score 85.8, 95% CI 83.2-88.4). CollaboRATE also demonstrated concurrent validity with other measures of SDM, excellent intrarater reliability, and sensitivity to change; however, divergent validity was not demonstrated.

Conclusions: The fast and frugal nature of CollaboRATE lends itself to routine clinical use. Further assessment of CollaboRATE in real-world settings is required.

Keywords: Internet; decision making; patient participation; physician-patient relations; psychometrics/Instrumentation; questionnaires.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Glyn Elwyn has received funding from the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation, Boston, MA, USA, and provides ad hoc consulting to Emmi Solutions. No other authors have conflicts of interests to report.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Independent observer ratings (n=7) of the simulated clinical encounters using the observer OPTION Scale and Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Coulter A, Edwards A, Elwyn G, Thomson R. Implementing shared decision making in the UK. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011 Jan;105(4):300–4. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Frosch DL, Moulton BW, Wexler RM, Holmes-Rovner M, Volk RJ, Levin CA. Shared decision making in the United States: policy and implementation activity on multiple fronts. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011;105(4):305–12. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Härter M, van der Weijden T, Elwyn G. Policy and practice developments in the implementation of shared decision making: an international perspective. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011 Jan;105(4):229–33. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.018. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making--pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 1;366(9):780–1. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1109283. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gravel K, Légaré F, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. Implement Sci. 2006 Jan;1:16. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-16. http://www.implementationscience.com/content/1//16 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources