PROM Detail

SURE scale
  • Basic Information
  • Detailed Information
  • Domains
  • Psychometrics

Basic Information

Abbreviated name
Full name
SURE scale
Items ?
The number of questions in the survey
Short description
SURE was developed so that there could be a shorter alternative to the Decisional Conflict Scale; a scale that allows health professionals to identify patients with decisional conflict (Legare, et al, 2010). The selection process for the four items within the measure was based on the core concepts of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, which are reported as having relevancy at all stages of the decision making process; feeling uncertain, feeling informed, feeling clear about values and feeling supported in decision-making (OConnor, et al, 1998) The items were developed in French and English concurrently and were all positively framed.
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.
Shared decision-making, decisional conflict
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”.
Respondent ?
The person that fills in the questionnaire - e.g. patient, Health Care Professional, or proxy (normally a carer or family member)

Detailed Information

Year developed ?
The year in which the measure was first published.
Country developed in ?
The main country[s] in which the measure was first developed.
Original publication ?
The publication in which the measure was originally published.
Search Citations of Original Reference
Target condition ?
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).
Primary care, hospital
Main countries used in ?
The main countries in which the measure has been developed and used.
Target age ?
e.g. Adults, Children, Elderly
Main uses of measure ?
The context in which the measure is most often used – e.g. clinical trials; national surveys.
Designed to screen for decisional conflict in patients.
Used in UK? ?
Whether the instrument has been tested and validated within a UK healthcare context.
Impact ?
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.
English, French


Domain description
We based our selection of the 4 items on core concepts of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, which are relevant at all stages of decision making: feeling uncertain, feeling informed, feeling clear about values, and feeling supported in decision making.14 A fifth core concept (i.e., the perceived effectiveness of the choice made) was not applicable to all stages of decision making.
Shared decision making
Information sharing


Brief description ?
A brief description of the initially reported psychometric properties of the measure.
SURE has been reported as having appropriate psychometric qualities and as being a suitable tool for use within primary care. However, the findings also indicated that the refinement of one item (support) should be considered (due to issues surrounding unidimensionality) and that further evaluations of the measure which could assess its performance in a broader group of patients were called (Legare, et al, 2010).