Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making

Abstract Background Obtaining a sample that is representative of the group of interest is of utmost importance in questionnaire studies. In a survey using a state authorized web-portal for citizen communication with authorities, we wanted to investigate the view of adult men on patient involvement i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Søren Birkeland, Thea Linkhorst, Anders Haakonsson, Michael John Barry, Sören Möller
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-09-01
Series:BMC Health Services Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-020-05717-1
id doaj-e8be6046cbef44429994f121d69cec9a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e8be6046cbef44429994f121d69cec9a2020-11-25T03:27:16ZengBMCBMC Health Services Research1472-69632020-09-012011810.1186/s12913-020-05717-1Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-makingSøren Birkeland0Thea Linkhorst1Anders Haakonsson2Michael John Barry3Sören Möller4Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark and Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark and Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark and Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University HospitalMGH Division of General Internal Medicine & Harvard Medical SchoolDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark and Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University HospitalAbstract Background Obtaining a sample that is representative of the group of interest is of utmost importance in questionnaire studies. In a survey using a state authorized web-portal for citizen communication with authorities, we wanted to investigate the view of adult men on patient involvement in health care decision-making regarding Prostate-Specific Antigen test for prostatic cancer. In this paper, we report on sample characteristics and representativeness of our sample in terms of personality and baseline involvement preferences. Methods We compared personality profiles (BFI-10) and baseline healthcare decision-making preferences (CPS) in our sample (n = 6756) to internationally available datasets. Pooled data from a) US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (n = 1512), b) Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Belgium (n = 1136), and c) Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark (n = 1313) were used for BFI-10 comparisons. Regarding CPS, we compared our sample with three previous datasets relating to decision-making in cancer (n = 425, 387, and 199). Results Although statistically significant differences particularly appeared in large dataset comparisons, sample BFI-10 and CPS profiles mostly were within the range of those previously reported. Similarity was greatest in BFI-10 comparisons with group a) where no statistically significant difference could be established in factors ‘agreeableness’ and ‘neuroticism’ (p = .095 and .578, respectively). Conclusion Despite some variation, our sample displays personality and baseline preference profiles that are generally similar to those described in previous international studies. For example, this was the case with the BFI-10 ‘agreeableness’ measure (incl. trust and fault-finding items), an important factor in healthcare decision-making.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-020-05717-1Research methodologyInternet-based surveyRepresentativenessGeneralizabilityPersonalityDecision making
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Søren Birkeland
Thea Linkhorst
Anders Haakonsson
Michael John Barry
Sören Möller
spellingShingle Søren Birkeland
Thea Linkhorst
Anders Haakonsson
Michael John Barry
Sören Möller
Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
BMC Health Services Research
Research methodology
Internet-based survey
Representativeness
Generalizability
Personality
Decision making
author_facet Søren Birkeland
Thea Linkhorst
Anders Haakonsson
Michael John Barry
Sören Möller
author_sort Søren Birkeland
title Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
title_short Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
title_full Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
title_fullStr Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
title_full_unstemmed Representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
title_sort representativeness of personality and involvement preferences in a web-based survey on healthcare decision-making
publisher BMC
series BMC Health Services Research
issn 1472-6963
publishDate 2020-09-01
description Abstract Background Obtaining a sample that is representative of the group of interest is of utmost importance in questionnaire studies. In a survey using a state authorized web-portal for citizen communication with authorities, we wanted to investigate the view of adult men on patient involvement in health care decision-making regarding Prostate-Specific Antigen test for prostatic cancer. In this paper, we report on sample characteristics and representativeness of our sample in terms of personality and baseline involvement preferences. Methods We compared personality profiles (BFI-10) and baseline healthcare decision-making preferences (CPS) in our sample (n = 6756) to internationally available datasets. Pooled data from a) US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (n = 1512), b) Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Belgium (n = 1136), and c) Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark (n = 1313) were used for BFI-10 comparisons. Regarding CPS, we compared our sample with three previous datasets relating to decision-making in cancer (n = 425, 387, and 199). Results Although statistically significant differences particularly appeared in large dataset comparisons, sample BFI-10 and CPS profiles mostly were within the range of those previously reported. Similarity was greatest in BFI-10 comparisons with group a) where no statistically significant difference could be established in factors ‘agreeableness’ and ‘neuroticism’ (p = .095 and .578, respectively). Conclusion Despite some variation, our sample displays personality and baseline preference profiles that are generally similar to those described in previous international studies. For example, this was the case with the BFI-10 ‘agreeableness’ measure (incl. trust and fault-finding items), an important factor in healthcare decision-making.
topic Research methodology
Internet-based survey
Representativeness
Generalizability
Personality
Decision making
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-020-05717-1
work_keys_str_mv AT sørenbirkeland representativenessofpersonalityandinvolvementpreferencesinawebbasedsurveyonhealthcaredecisionmaking
AT thealinkhorst representativenessofpersonalityandinvolvementpreferencesinawebbasedsurveyonhealthcaredecisionmaking
AT andershaakonsson representativenessofpersonalityandinvolvementpreferencesinawebbasedsurveyonhealthcaredecisionmaking
AT michaeljohnbarry representativenessofpersonalityandinvolvementpreferencesinawebbasedsurveyonhealthcaredecisionmaking
AT sorenmoller representativenessofpersonalityandinvolvementpreferencesinawebbasedsurveyonhealthcaredecisionmaking
_version_ 1724588645742018560