hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A coding system to measure elements of shared decision making during psychiatric visits
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis.
Roudebush Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Indianapolis; Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis.
University of Kansas.
University of Kansas.
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Psychiatric Services, ISSN 1075-2730, E-ISSN 1557-9700, Vol. 63, no 8, p. 779-784Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: Shared decision making is widely recognized to facilitate effective health care. The purpose of this study was to assess the applicability and usefulness of a scale to measure the presence and extent of shared decision making in clinical decisions in psychiatric practice. Methods: A coding scheme assessing shared decision making in general medical settings was adapted to mental health settings, and a manual for using the scheme was created. Trained raters used the adapted scale to analyze 170 audio-recordings of medication check-up visits with either psychiatrists or nurse practitioners. The scale assessed the level of shared decision making based on the presence of nine specific elements. Interrater reliability was examined, and the frequency with which elements of shared decision making were observed was documented. The association between visit length and extent of shared decision making was also examined. Results: Interrater reliability among three raters on a subset of 20 recordings ranged from 67% to 100% agreement for the presence of each of the nine elements of shared decision making and 100% for the agreement between provider and consumer on decisions made. Of the 170 sessions, 128 (75%) included a clinical decision. Just over half of the decisions (53%) met minimum criteria for shared decision making. Shared decision making was not related to visit length after the analysis controlled for the complexity of the decision. Conclusions: The rating scale appears to reliably assess shared decision making in psychiatric practice and could be helpful for future research, training, and implementation efforts.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 63, no 8, p. 779-784
Keywords [en]
adult, article, audio recording, clinical decision making, female, human, interrater reliability, major clinical study, male, medical examination, mental health care, mental health service, nurse, psychiatrist, scoring system, Clinical Coding, Decision Making, Humans, Mental Disorders, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Physician-Patient Relations, Psychiatry, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-38550DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100496Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84864686705OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-38550DiVA, id: diva2:1659682
Available from: 2022-05-20 Created: 2022-05-20 Last updated: 2022-05-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Holter, Mark

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Holter, Mark
In the same journal
Psychiatric Services
Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 70 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf