The Chinese Version of Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): Reliability and Validity

AIM: This study aims to translate the Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD) into the Chinese language and to test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the scale in the gynecological clinic. METHODS: After obtaining the permission of the original author, the Brislin translation model was used to forward-translation and back-translation. Then, an expert group was set up to discuss this scale and result in cross-cultural adaptation. A convenient sampling method was used to select ten doctors working in the gynecological clinic of two top-three hospitals and 20 patients of each doctor. The Rochester Decision Participation Scale was used by the Chinese version for investigation. RESULTS: The Chinese version of the Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale has a Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.604 for the total content reliability, the Spearman–Brown coefficient of half-reliability is 0.646, and the Guttman coefficient of half-reliability is 0.612. The retest reliability is 0.922. By exploratory factor analysis, the scale extracted three common factors, and the standard factor load corresponding to each entry is higher than 0.4. CONCLUSION: The reliability and validity of the Chinese version in the Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale are acceptable, which can be used to evaluate doctors “promotion of patients” participation in decision-making.