Measurement Properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)

Abstract: The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) is widely used to measure shared decision-making (SDM) across clinical settings, but no study so far has synthesized its psychometric properties. In the present study, we systematically reviewed and synthesized psychometric evidence on the SDM-Q-9. The MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases were searched for original studies in English or German, providing any information on psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 considering all possible interpretations and constructs measured by the instrument. Details on study design, sample characteristics, and information on psychometric evidence were extracted. We included 101 studies, with 49 articles contributing evidence on reliability, 91 on validity (87 on interrelations with other variables and 68 on the internal structure), and three on fairness. We found a high amount of psychometric evidence on the validity and reliability of the SDM-Q-9 as a measure of SDM perceived by the patient. Evidence is lacking for other interpretations and fairness. Notable is the weak association of the SDM-Q-9 with physician-rated SDM. In summary, substantial evidence supports reliability and validity of the SDM-Q-9 for assessing the subjectively experienced level of SDM by the patient, but further research is needed on alternative interpretations and on fairness of the measure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Psychological Assessment
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000952
Primary Topic
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measurement Properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)

Isabelle Scholl, Levente Kriston, Martin Härter, Jette Echterhoff et al.
European Journal of Psychological Assessment
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
article

Measurement Properties of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)

Isabelle Scholl, Levente Kriston, Martin Härter, Jette Echterhoff, Jonas Petter
article en

Abstract

Abstract: The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) is widely used to measure shared decision-making (SDM) across clinical settings, but no study so far has synthesized its psychometric properties. In the present study, we systematically reviewed and synthesized psychometric evidence on the SDM-Q-9. The MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases were searched for original studies in English or German, providing any information on psychometric properties of the SDM-Q-9 considering all possible interpretations and constructs measured by the instrument. Details on study design, sample characteristics, and information on psychometric evidence were extracted. We included 101 studies, with 49 articles contributing evidence on reliability, 91 on validity (87 on interrelations with other variables and 68 on the internal structure), and three on fairness. We found a high amount of psychometric evidence on the validity and reliability of the SDM-Q-9 as a measure of SDM perceived by the patient. Evidence is lacking for other interpretations and fairness. Notable is the weak association of the SDM-Q-9 with physician-rated SDM. In summary, substantial evidence supports reliability and validity of the SDM-Q-9 for assessing the subjectively experienced level of SDM by the patient, but further research is needed on alternative interpretations and on fairness of the measure.

European Journal of Psychological Assessment
University of Copenhagen (DK), Universität Hamburg (DE), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.