A Coding System to Measure Elements of Shared Decision Making During Psychiatric Visits

Salyers, Michelle P.; Matthias, Marianne S.; Fukui, Sadaaki; Holter, Mark C.; Collins, Linda; Rose, Nichole; Thompson, John; Coffman, Melinda; Torrey, William C.

doi:10.1176/appi.ps.201100496

Cited by 40 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We used Gwet’s AC1 as opposed to the more commonly used kappa statistic because kappa does not correct for chance agreement and is difficult to use with multiple raters. In accordance with past research using Gwet’s AC1 (Salyers et al, 2012; Vlastarakos et al, 2012), we interpreted values >0.8 to indicate strong agreement, values of 0.6–0.8 to indicate moderate agreement, values of 0.3–0.5 to indicate fair agreement, and values below 0.3 to indicate poor agreement.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…In the development of the coding scheme, we also pulled from elements of shared decision-making (Salyers et al, 2012) and agenda-setting (Frankel et al, 2013). Development and finalization of the coding scheme was an iterative process, with three of the authors reading transcripts, applying codes, and meeting to discuss how the concepts fit with the data and suggest improvement to the coding scheme.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Correlates of observer-rated active involvement in psychiatric treatment visits

Bonfils

Luther

Fukui

et al. 2017

Psychiatry Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among people with serious mental illness, increased patient activation has been linked to a range of key recovery outcomes. To date, patient activation has been measured largely through self-report. The present study investigated correlates of a new tool that assesses active involvement through rating audio-recordings of treatment visits. The key domains of patient activation assessed in visits included: patients asking questions, discussing with providers instances of being active in managing illness outside the session, talking about goals, bringing up concerns, making evaluative statements about treatment, setting the agenda for the visit, and making requests about the course of treatment. The new coding scheme proved to be a feasible and reliable method for identifying multi-faceted behavioral indicators of patient activation. Contrary to our hypotheses, in a sample of 166 people diagnosed with severe mental illnesses, self-reported activation and observer-rated indices of activation were often not correlated or correlated in unexpected directions with the new behavioral measure of patient activation. This suggests the nature of patient activation may be complex and work is needed to understand how observer-rated and self-rated activation may predict differential recovery outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlates of observer-rated active involvement in psychiatric treatment visits

Bonfils

Luther

Fukui

et al. 2017

Psychiatry Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there is little or no consensus about the core set of measures and constructs for SDM in MH, and the evidence available on the performance of published instruments is variable (Salyers et al 2012;Scholl et al 2011;Metz et al 2015;Bouniols et al 2016). In this sense, theory development on a set of core constructs to be measured is paramount.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement issues of shared decision making in mental health: challenges and opportunities

Perestelo-Pérez

Rivero‐Santana

Álvarez‐Pérez

et al. 2017

MHRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Shared decision making (SDM) is a model of health care in which patients are involved in the decision-making process about their treatment, considering their preferences and concerns in a deliberative process with the health care provider. Many existing instruments assess the antecedents, process, or the outcomes of SDM. The purpose of this paper is to identify the SDM-related measures applied in a mental health context. Design/methodology/approach The authors performed a systematic review in several electronic databases from 1990 to October 2016. Studies that assessed quantitatively one or more constructs related to SDM (antecedents, process, and outcomes) in the field of mental health were included. Findings The authors included 87 studies that applied 48 measures on distinct SDM constructs. A large majority of them have been developed in the field of physical diseases and adapted or directly applied in the mental health context. The most evaluated construct is the SDM process in consultation, mainly by patients’ self-report but also by external observer measures, followed by the patients’ preferences for involvement in decision making. The most applied instrument was the Autonomy Preference Index, followed by the Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making (OPTION) and the Control Preferences Scale (CPS). The psychometric validation in mental health samples of the instruments identified is scarce. Research limitations/implications The bibliographic search is comprehensive, but could not be completely exhaustive. Effort should be invested in the development of new SDM for mental health tools that will reflect the complexity and specific features of mental health care. Originality/value The authors highlight several limitations and challenges for the measurement of SDM in mental health care.

show abstract

“…However, this does not always happen (Hamann et al, 2009; Salyers et al, 2012; Salyers et al, 2009). In the absence of explicit provider invitations, consumers have a choice either to be passive, or to take the initiative to become more active in the visit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, some studies indicate that the frequency of SDM is generally low, both in physical and mental health contexts (Braddock et al, 2008; de las Cuevas, Rivero-Santana, Perestelo-Perez, & Serrano-Aguilar, 2013; Goss et al, 2008; Salyers et al, 2012). In physical health, research indicates that patients often do not share questions and concerns with their providers, do not ask for information, and may be reluctant to voice their opinions because of pressure to conform to “traditional” patient roles or fear of being labeled “difficult” (Beisecker & Beisecker, 1990; Frosch, May, Rendle, Tietbohl, & Elwyn, 2012; Korsch, Gozzi, & Francis, 1968; Roter et al, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Factors are Associated with Consumer Initiation of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Visits?

Matthias

Fukui

Salyers

2015

Adm Policy Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding consumer initiation of shared decision making (SDM) is critical to improving SDM in mental health consultations, particularly because providers do not always invite consumer participation in treatment decisions. This study examined the association between consumer initiation of nine elements of SDM as measured by the SDM scale, and measures of consumer illness self-management and the consumer-provider relationship. In 63 mental health visits, three SDM elements were associated with self-management or relationship factors: discussion of consumer goals, treatment alternatives, and pros and cons of a decision. Limitations, implications, and future directions are discussed.

show abstract

A Coding System to Measure Elements of Shared Decision Making During Psychiatric Visits

Cited by 40 publications

References 26 publications

Correlates of observer-rated active involvement in psychiatric treatment visits

Correlates of observer-rated active involvement in psychiatric treatment visits

Measurement issues of shared decision making in mental health: challenges and opportunities

What Factors are Associated with Consumer Initiation of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Visits?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About