Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The decision evaluation scales.

Peep F M Stalmeier1, Marielle S Roosmalen, Lia C G Verhoef

  • 1Medical Technology Assessment, University Medical Centre Nijmegen, Postbus 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands. p.stalmeier@mta.umcn.nl

Patient Education and Counseling
|May 17, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

European Reference Networks as core health structures where referring genetic newborn screening positive infants: an innovative operational research framework.

Frontiers in public health·2026
Same author

Hereditary cancer: Germline testing practices across ERN GENTURIS member countries.

European journal of human genetics : EJHG·2026
Same author

Personalized risk estimates of advanced neoplasia development in individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer.

Familial cancer·2026
Same author

Correction: Hereditary gynecological cancer management in women with Lynch syndrome: a survey across Europe.

Familial cancer·2026
Same author

Vaccine strategies for cancer prevention in Lynch syndrome: the potential of dendritic cell-based therapy.

Familial cancer·2026
Same author

Genome Sequencing of Undiagnosed European Patients Suspected of Hereditary Cancer: Diagnostic Yield and Identification of Candidate Causative Variants.

JCO precision oncology·2026
Same journal

Virga and the future of motivational interviewing: Issues in training counseling skills.

Patient education and counseling·2026
Same journal

Informed choices: Patients' and healthcare professionals' perspectives on high-risk prostate cancer treatment decision-making.

Patient education and counseling·2026
Same journal

Factors influencing patients switching back to physical channels for health consultations.

Patient education and counseling·2026
Same journal

Challenges in advising people with severe mental illness to quit smoking: A conversation analysis of patient resistance.

Patient education and counseling·2026
Same journal

Alleviating the burden: The impact of interpersonal and digital communication on depressive symptoms in cancer survivors.

Patient education and counseling·2026
Same journal

Are patient goals discussed during treatment decision-making in patients with head and neck cancer? A qualitative content analysis of consultations.

Patient education and counseling·2026
See all related articles

This study identified key psychological factors in medical treatment choices, finding that "Decision Control" significantly impacts patient well-being and decision aid evaluation. This offers new insights for patient-centered care.

Area of Science:

  • Health Psychology
  • Medical Decision Making
  • Psychometrics

Background:

  • Assessing patient evaluation of medical treatment choices is crucial for decision aid development.
  • Understanding psychological factors influencing these evaluations is essential for improving patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the psychological factors influencing how patients evaluate their medical treatment choices.
  • To develop and validate scales measuring these psychological factors for use with decision aids.

Main Methods:

  • A 36-item pool assessing decision satisfaction, uncertainty, informed choice, responsibility, risk perception, and social support was developed.
  • Factor and Rasch analyses were used for item selection and scale development.
  • Construct validity was assessed by correlating scales with additional measures in high-risk cancer patients choosing between surgery or screening.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Three key psychological factors emerged: Satisfaction-Uncertainty, Informed Choice, and Decision Control.
  • All scales demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.79, 0.85, 0.75).
  • The Decision Control scale showed the strongest correlation with well-being, partner agreement, and physician preferences, and was linked to negative reactions to information.

Conclusions:

  • The study validated three scales for evaluating psychological factors in medical decision-making.
  • The novel Decision Control scale is a valuable tool for assessing decision aids and is grounded in health psychology.
  • Decision Control appears particularly important for patient well-being in complex medical choices.