Table 5.

Example Questions and Considerations When Selecting Measures of Perceived Risk Across Clinical Management and Research Intervention Contexts

COMMUNITY/CLINIC CONTEXT:
Who will assess perceived risk and how?
• Measuring perceived risk during clinical encounter with one to two brief items may be necessary due to limited time with provider • When measuring perceived risk when implementing a community-based diabetes prevention program, limited interactions and type of interactions with participants may dictate type of measures used • Measuring perceived risk with subscales and multiple items may require additional resources (e.g., front staff, patient portal, patient reminders) to ensure patient answers questions before clinical encounter
What is the patient population?
• Patient health literacy and numeracy may limit measurement or number of items used • Peers and environment may influence who patient compares him/herself to if asked comparative risk
How will the data be used?
• If used to guide provider-patient discussions, one to two brief items may be sufficient • If used to identify patients eligible for diabetes prevention or disease management programs, measurement of multiple subconstructs or modifiers can provide more nuanced details • How community organizations share data with other entities (e.g., healthcare systems) may impact type of data collected
Is actual/calculated risk known?
• Combined with perceived risk, provider knowledge of patient’s actual risk can guide provider-patient discussions about behaviors • Patient knowledge of actual risk can influence perceived risk. Provider should know whether patient knows his/her actual risk to better interpret perceived risk
Are related constructs measured?
• Measuring perceived severity, for example, in addition to perceived risk can highlight patient knowledge gaps and areas where additional patient education about disease may be needed
RESEARCH INTERVENTION CONTEXT:
What is the theoretical framework?
• Selecting and measuring variables grounded in theory can describe hypothesized relationships a priori • A validated or reliable instrument may have the same theoretical underpinnings as the theoretical framework associated with the intervention potentially eliminating the need to create a new measure
What is the participant population?
• Participant health literacy and numeracy may limit measurement or number of items used • Intervention context may mean additional resources are available to administer survey which can help reduce limitations of participant health literacy or numeracy (e.g., research assistant to administer via structured interview) • Peers and environment may influence who participant compares him/herself to if asked comparative risk
How will the data be used?
• If using to identify patients eligible for a specific intervention or program, measurement of multiple subconstructs or modifiers can provide more nuanced details • If comparing to broader literature, selecting validated instrument may facilitate comparison across studies using the same instrument • If perceived risk is not part of primary research question, limiting items related to the construct can reduce participant survey burden
Are related constructs measured?
• Measures incorporating multiple subscales or constructs may help identify specific mechanisms through which the intervention works