Validation of the Malay,English,and Chinese Translations of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in Breast Cancer Patients Making Treatment Decisions
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online November, 2021
Validation of the Malay,English,and Chinese Translations of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in Breast Cancer Patients Making Treatment Decisions
This study aims to test the psychometric properties of the Malay, English, and Chinese 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in breast cancer patients making treatment decisions. The original German SDM-Q-9 was translated to Malay using the back-translation method. A total of 222 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients making treatment decisions were sampled conveniently from three breast clinics between August 2015 and February 2016. A total of 66 patients answered the SDM-Q-9 in Malay, 87 in English, and 69 in Chinese. Data were analyzed using SPSS and AMOS software. SDM-Q-9 demonstrated good reliability in the three translations. All the items correlated well except for Item 1 in English. The factor loadings were within acceptable range except for Item 1 in Malay, Items 1 and 2 in English, and Items 7 and 9 in Chinese SDM-Q-9. However, no items were deleted in accordance with experts’ opinions and the previous SDM-Q-9 validation studies. The Malay, English, and Chinese SDM-Q-9 demonstrated good reliability and validity.
MakoulGClaymanML.An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;60:301-312.
2.
CharlesCGafniAWhelanT.Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med. 1997;44:681-692.
3.
ShayLALafataJE.Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes. Med Decis Making. 2015;35:114-131.
4.
StaceyDLégaréFLewisK, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;(4):CD001431.
5.
LohASimonDKristonLHärterM.Patient involvement in medical decisions—effects of participatory decision-making from systematic reviews [in German]. Dtsch Arztebl. 2007;104: A1483-A1488.
6.
National Cancer Registry, Ministry of Health Malaysia. Malaysian National Cancer Registry Report 2012-2016. National Cancer Registry; 2019.
7.
KatzSJBelkoraJElwynG.Shared decision making for treatment of cancer: challenges and opportunities. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10:206-208.
8.
HackTFDegnerLFParkerPA; SCRN Communication Team. The communication goals and needs of cancer patients: a review. Psychooncology. 2005;14:831-845.
9.
RuttenLJFAroraNKBakosADAzizNRowlandJ. Information needs and sources of information among cancer patients: a systematic review of research (1980-2003). Patient Educ Couns. 2005;57:250-261.
10.
NiesYHIslahudinFChongWW, et al. Treatment decision-making among breast cancer patients in Malaysia. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:1767.
11.
SepuchaKRSchollI.Measuring shared decision making: a review of constructs, measures, and opportunities for cardiovascular care. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:620-626.
12.
BarryMJ.Involving patients in medical decisions: how can physicians do better?JAMA. 1999;282:2356-2357.
13.
SepuchaKRFowlerFJJrMulleyAGJr.Policy support for patient-centered care: the need for measurable improvements in decision quality. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(suppl variation):VAR54-VAR62.
14.
SepuchaKRBorkhoffCMLallyJ, et al. Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments. BMC Medical Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(suppl 2):S12.
15.
KristonLSchollIHölzelLSimonDLohAHärterM.The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;80:94-99.
16.
SimonDSchorrGWirtzM, et al. Development and first validation of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q). Patient Educ Couns. 2006;63:319-327.
17.
De las CuevasCPerestelo-PerezLRivero-SantanaACebolla-MartíASchollIHärterM. Validation of the Spanish version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire. Health Expect. 2015;18:2143-2153.
18.
Rodenburg-VandenbusscheSPieterseAHKroonenbergPM, et al. Dutch translation and psychometric testing of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and Shared Decision Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) in primary and secondary care. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0132158.
19.
Zisman-IlaniYRoeDSchollIHärterMKarnieli-MillerO.Shared decision making during active psychiatric hospitalization: assessment and psychometric properties. Health Commun. 2017;32:126-130.
20.
HulbækMJørgensenMJMainzH, et al. Danish translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire–Patient version (SDM-Q-9-Pat). Eur J Pers Cent Healthc. 2018;6:438-446.
21.
AlzubaidiHHusseinAMcNamaraKSchollI.Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: the entire process from translation to validation. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e026672.
22.
RenczFTamásiBBrodszkyVGulácsiLWeszlMPéntekM.Validity and reliability of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in a national survey in Hungary. Eur J Health Econ. 2019;20(suppl 1):43-55.
23.
NejatiBLinCCImaniV, et al. Validating patient and physician versions of the shared decision making questionnaire in oncology setting. Health Promot Perspect. 2019;9:105-114.
24.
BaicusCBalanescuPGurgheanA, et al. Romanian version of SDM-Q-9 validation in internal medicine and cardiology setting: a multicentric cross-sectional study. Rom J Intern Med. 2019;57:195-200.
25.
LuoBXiaoS.Reliability and validity for Chinese version of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire [in Chinese]. Zhong Nan Da Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2019;44:823-829.
26.
BeatonDEBombardierCGuilleminFFerrazMB.Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:3186-3191.
27.
SimonDLohAHärterM.Development and evaluation of interventions to support shared decision making—framework and measuring instruments [in German]. Z Med Psychol. 2008;17:149-159.
28.
PolitDFBeckCT.The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29:489-497.
29.
ShunnmugamB.Validation of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in Breast Cancer Patients Making Treatment Decisions [Master’s thesis]. Kuala Lumpur, University of Malaya; 2021.
30.
WuMTHennessyMHuWY. Mandarin Chinese translation version of the original “9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Patient als Partner. 2012; Revised 2015.
31.
AnthoineEMoretLRegnaultASébilleVHardouinJB.Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176.
32.
HairJFJrAndersonRETathamRLBlackWC.Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th ed.Prentice Hall; 2005.
33.
ByrneBM.Multivariate Applications Series. Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. 2nd ed.Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2010.
34.
BrislinRW.Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1970;1:185-216.
35.
WildDGroveAMartinM, et al; ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8:94-104.
36.
LeeYKNgCJ.The state of shared decision making in Malaysia. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundheitswes. 2017;123:66-68.
37.
WuTYChenCTHuangYJHouWHWangJDHsiehCL.Rasch analysis of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire in women with breast cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2019;42:E34-E42.
38.
EtikanIMusaSAAlkassimRS.Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. AJTAS. 2016;5:1-4.
