Values Clarification Tool for Teen Girls and Parents: Pilot Results

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwendolyn P. Quinn ◽  
Caprice A. Knapp ◽  
Devin Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Values Clarification

The power of nursing: An innovative course in values clarification and self-discovery

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Day ◽  
Scott R. Ziehm ◽  
Martha A. Jessup ◽  
Pattie Amedro ◽  
Carol Dawson-Rose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Values Clarification ◽  
Self Discovery

Observer Ratings of Shared Decision Making Do Not Match Patient Reports: An Observational Study in 5 Family Medicine Practices

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-59
Author(s):  
Gisèle Diendéré ◽  
Imen Farhat ◽  
Holly Witteman ◽  
Ruth Ndjaboue
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Clinical Encounter ◽  
Values Clarification ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Consultations

Background Measuring shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice is important to improve the quality of health care. Measurement can be done by trained observers and by people participating in the clinical encounter, namely, patients. This study aimed to describe the correlations between patients’ and observers’ ratings of SDM using 2 validated and 2 nonvalidated SDM measures in clinical consultations. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 238 complete dyads of health professionals and patients in 5 university-affiliated family medicine clinics in Canada. Participants completed self-administered questionnaires before and after audio-recorded medical consultations. Observers rated the occurrence of SDM during medical consultations using both the validated OPTION-5 (the 5-item “observing patient involvement” score) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-observer). Patients rated SDM using both the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q9) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-patient). Results Agreement was low between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using validated OPTION-5 and SDM-Q9, respectively (ρ = 0.07; P = 0.38). Observers’ ratings using RCVC-observer were correlated to patients’ ratings using either SDM-Q9 ( rpb = −0.16; P = 0.01) or RCVC-patients ( rpb = 0.24; P = 0.03). Observers’ OPTION-5 scores and patients’ ratings using RCVC-questions were moderately correlated ( rφ = 0.33; P = 0.04). Conclusion There was moderate to no alignment between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using both validated and nonvalidated measures. This lack of strong correlation emphasizes that observer and patient perspectives are not interchangeable. When assessing the presence, absence, or extent of SDM, it is important to clearly state whose perspectives are reflected.

scholarly journals The effects of an `explicit' values clarification exercise in a woman's decision aid regarding postmenopausal hormone therapy

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette M. O'Connor ◽  
George A. Wells ◽  
Peter Tugwell ◽  
Andreas Laupacis ◽  
Tom Elmslie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hormone Therapy ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Values Clarification ◽  
Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy ◽  
Postmenopausal Hormone
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document