A tool that identifies the factors contributing to difficulty in decision-making regarding treatment and evaluates decision-supporting interventions.
PCCC or QoL?
This compendium contains patient-reported measures that are either designed to specifically measure aspects of Person Centred Co-Ordinated Care (P3C), or alternatively tools that are designed to measure some aspect of Quality of Life (QoL) or Health Related Quality of Life (hrQoL). All the measures in this compendium have been broadly categorised into one of those two concepts.
Person Centred Coordinated Care
Main Domains Measured
This is the key domains that the measure is targeting.
Type of measure
The measures in this compendium can take a variety of forms. Generally, they will be either Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) or Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM). However, we have also included a few measures that are completed by proxy-individual (PROXY), which are useful in instances where the respondent cannot answer directly (e.g. dementia or end of life). Sometimes, these measures can even be a composite of these types, and target both experiences and outcomes – we have labelled these measures “PROEMs”.
The person that fills in the questionnaire - e.g. patient, Health Care Professional, or proxy (normally a carer or family member)
Whether the measure is free to use without major restrictions, or instead permission and/or licensing fees are required. E.g. if "Yes", you should seek authorisation/permission prior to using the instrument.
The measures can be either generic or disease specific (e.g. Diabetes, Heart Failure)
Main context tested in
The main context in which the measure has been developed and used (E.g. Hopital, General Practice etc).
Various - including Primary care, hospital, community
Main countries used in
The main countries in which the measure has been developed and used.
e.g. Adults, Children, Elderly
Adults and older people
Main uses of measure
The context in which the measure is most often used – e.g. clinical trials; national surveys.
Identifcation of the factors contributing to difficulty in decision-making regarding treatment and evaluation of decision-supporting interventions.
Used in UK?
Whether the instrument has been tested and validated within a UK healthcare context.
A crude indication of the impact of the measure on academia. This is the number of times the original publication has been cited on PubMed, divided/normalised to the years since publication.
Flesch-Kincaid readability tests
A rating that corresponds approximately to US school grade level. For example, a score of 8.0 means that an eighth grader can understand the document. Generally, a score of 7 or 8 should be appropriate.
Decision making (depends on context of use)
Generic care planning
Shared decision making
Behaviour and communication skills
A brief description of the initially reported psychometric properties of the measure.
The decision scales had adequate internal consistency (range 0.78 to 0.84).