Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 18, 2026

Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning

Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning

Published on: August 29, 2025

Quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision-making: a comprehensive systematic review and COSMIN

Christin Hoffmann¹, Samuel Lawday², Vignesh Gopalan^2,3

¹National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK c.hoffmann@bristol.ac.uk.

BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

|June 16, 2026

Abstract:

ObjectiveShared decision-making (SDM) is a key component of patient-centred care and major driver of healthcare policy, clinical practice and research globally. Widespread implementation of SDM is hindered by uncertainty about how to best measure decision-making processes. A seminal methodological review of SDM instruments published in 2018 identified widespread deficiencies in instrument quality and provided recommendations for improvement. This systematic review and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) quality appraisal aims to provide an update SDM instrument inventory, re-evaluated progress in the field and provided future direction for researchers, funders and policymakers. This systematic review and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) quality appraisal aims to provide an update SDM instrument inventory, re-evaluated progress in the field and provided future direction for researchers, funders and policymakers.

Design:

A systematic search of six databases (September 2017-December 2024) identified studies of instruments measuring the process of SDM. Instrument appraisal followed COSMIN guidelines in a three-step process: appraisal of the methodological quality of instruments and of the quality of the measurement properties of newly identified measures (steps i, ii). This informed the comprehensive best-evidence synthesis which included the data from the original review (step iii).

Results:

A total of 127 studies were included describing the development and/or evaluation of 105 unique instruments to measure the process of SDM. Some 61 new instruments were identified since the last review, of which 35 (57%) were translations/revisions to existing ones. The best-evidence synthesis revealed positive results for internal consistency (72%), structural validity (75%) and intrarater reliability (50%), but also negative or unknown results for test-retest reliability (58%), content validity (54%) and intrarater reliability (50%), where evaluated. No single instrument consistently showed positive evidence across all relevant measurement properties. Evidence gaps for many properties remain.

Conclusion:

This updated inventory guides researchers, clinicians and policymakers to the most appropriate instrument for an intended context/population. There was a proliferation of new, primarily patient-reported measurement instruments, but no single instrument had sufficient evidence of measurement quality. Methods were aligned with the original review and applied the 2011 COSMIN checklist which was updated in 2024, although using a previous checklist version is unlikely to affect overall conclusions. We recommend an international consensus with key interest holders on preferred instrument(s) for further validation and future core measurement set for efficient evidence synthesis.

Registration:

Prospero: CRD42024485655.

Keywords:

Delivery of Health Care Health Care Quality, Access, and Evaluation Health Services Research

Related Concept Videos

Quality Assurance

Quality Assurance

Quality assurance is the overarching term used to describe the activities employed to ensure the proper performance of a system. These activities can be classified into three categories: quality control, quality assessment, and internal corrective measures. Typically, these activities work cyclically: quality control is performed before and during the analysis, while quality assessment occurs during and after the investigation. Internal corrective measures are implemented based on the findings...

Decision Making

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

Data Validation

Data Validation

Data validation is an essential part of a comprehensive assessment. Validation is confirming or verifying and opening the door to gathering more assessment data as it clarifies vague or unclear data. The process of checking and verifying the collected information is called data validation. The primary purpose of data validation is to ensure data is as free from error, bias, and misinterpretation as possible.
Nursing assessment guides are generally based on holistic models rather than medical...

Critical Thinking II

Critical Thinking II

Critical thinking is a cognitive process with several attributes. The attributes of critical thinking include the following:

Decision Making: P-value Method

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...

Methods of Documentation III: PIE

Methods of Documentation III: PIE

Problem-intervention-evaluation (PIE) is a systematic approach to documentation used in healthcare settings for clinical decision-making and patient care planning. It is a structured approach to organizing patient data based on problems, interventions, and evaluations. Here's a breakdown of its key features and considerations:

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

Development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of shared decision-making interventions in healthcare: a study protocol.

BMJ open·2026

Barriers and facilitators to STI and HIV testing among African and Caribbean heritage communities in high-income countries mapped to the behaviour change wheel: a scoping review.

BMC public health·2026

PICCOS: study protocol for pressurised intraperitoneal aerosolised chemotherapy (PIPAC) in the management of cancers of the colon, ovary and stomach: a randomised controlled, phase II trial of efficacy in peritoneal metastases.

Pleura and peritoneum·2026

Patient perspectives of multimodal prehabilitation for ovarian cancer with surgical intent: a multicentre qualitative evaluation of acceptability, barriers and facilitators for participation.

BMJ open quality·2026

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy versus usual care for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention: the SWHSI 2 pragmatic RCT.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026

Considerations for the Role and Implementation of Reproductive Health Shared Decision-Making Interventions for Cystic Fibrosis: A Qualitative Investigation of Perspectives From Clinicians and Females With Cystic Fibrosis.

Pediatric pulmonology·2026

See all related articles