Assessing the Quality of Decision Support Technologies
Author Information
Author(s): Elwyn Glyn, O'Connor Annette M., Bennett Carol, Newcombe Robert G., Politi Mary, Durand Marie-Anne, Drake Elizabeth, Joseph-Williams Natalie, Khangura Sara, Saarimaki Anton, Sivell Stephanie, Stiel Mareike, Bernstein Steven J., Col Nananda, Coulter Angela, Eden Karen, Härter Martin, Rovner Margaret Holmes, Moumjid Nora, Stacey Dawn, Thomson Richard, Whelan Tim, van der Weijden Trudy, Edwards Adrian
Primary Institution: Cardiff University
Hypothesis
To describe the development, validation and inter-rater reliability of an instrument to measure the quality of patient decision support technologies.
Conclusion
The IPDASi instrument can effectively assess the quality of decision support technologies.
Supporting Evidence
- IPDASi measures quality in 10 dimensions using 47 items.
- Overall IPDASi scores ranged from 33 to 82 across the decision support technologies sampled.
- The inter-rater intraclass correlation for the overall quality score was 0.80.
- Cronbach's alpha values for the 8 raters ranged from 0.72 to 0.93.
Takeaway
This study created a tool to check how good decision aids are for helping patients make choices about their health.
Methodology
The study involved scale development, validation, and reliability testing with 30 decision support technologies assessed by eight raters.
Potential Biases
Raters were all researchers in the field, which may introduce bias in scoring.
Limitations
The study focused only on decision support technologies developed in English and had a limited sample size.
Participant Demographics
Twenty-five researcher-members of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration participated.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
0.79 to 0.92
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website