Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPuschner, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorNeumann, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorJordan, Hen_US
dc.contributor.authorSlade, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorFiorillo, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorGiacco, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorEgerházi, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorIvánka, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorBording, MKen_US
dc.contributor.authorSørensen, HØen_US
dc.contributor.authorBär, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorKawohl, Wen_US
dc.contributor.authorLoos, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorCEDAR study groupen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-06T15:02:54Z
dc.date.available2013-01-29en_US
dc.date.issued2013-02-04en_US
dc.date.submitted2016-08-19T15:28:13.969Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/15007
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate psychometric properties of the Clinical Decision Making Style (CDMS) scale which measures general preferences for decision making as well as preferences regarding the provision of information to the patient from the perspectives of people with severe mental illness and staff. METHODS: A participatory approach was chosen for instrument development which followed 10 sequential steps proposed in a current guideline of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation of measures. Following item analysis, reliability, validity, and long-term stability of the CDMS were examined using Spearman correlations in a sample of 588 people with severe mental illness and 213 mental health professionals in 6 European countries (Germany, UK, Italy, Denmark, Hungary, and Switzerland). RESULTS: In both patient and staff versions, the two CDMS subscales "Participation in Decision Making" and "Information" reliably measure distinct characteristics of decision making. Validity could be demonstrated to some extent, but needs further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Together with two other five-language patient- and staff-rated measures developed in the CEDAR study (ISRCTN75841675) - "Clinical Decision Making in Routine Care" and "Clinical Decision Making Involvement and Satisfaction" - the CDMS allows empirical investigation of the complex relation between clinical decision making and outcome in the treatment of people with severe mental illness across Europe.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe CEDAR study is funded by a grant from the European Union' Seventh Framework Programme (Programme Acronym: FP7-HEALTH; Subprogramme area: Improving clinical decision making; Project Reference: 223290).en_US
dc.format.extent48 - ?en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Psychiatryen_US
dc.rightsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.subjectAdulten_US
dc.subjectCross-Cultural Comparisonen_US
dc.subjectDecision Makingen_US
dc.subjectDenmarken_US
dc.subjectFemaleen_US
dc.subjectGermanyen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectHungaryen_US
dc.subjectItalyen_US
dc.subjectLanguageen_US
dc.subjectMaleen_US
dc.subjectMental Disordersen_US
dc.subjectPatient Participationen_US
dc.subjectPsychological Testsen_US
dc.subjectPsychometricsen_US
dc.subjectReproducibility of Resultsen_US
dc.subjectSwitzerlanden_US
dc.subjectUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.titleDevelopment and psychometric properties of a five-language multiperspective instrument to assess clinical decision making style in the treatment of people with severe mental illness (CDMS).en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© 2013 Puschner et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-244X-13-48en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23379280en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
pubs.volume13en_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2013-01-29en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record