Assessing Patient Motivation for Treatment: A Systematic Review of Available Tools, Their Measurement Properties, and Conceptual Definition.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Motivation is often reported by clinicians and researchers as a key factor related to treatment and health outcomes. This systematic review aims to (a) Identify and critically appraise tools that measure patient motivation for treatment and (b) determine how these tools define and evaluate motivation. METHODS: Library databases and the search engine Google Scholar were examined. Identified tools measuring patient motivation for treatment and reported measurement properties were selected. RESULTS: 14 peer-reviewed articles covering 12 different tools made the final selection. Quality was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and a new measure checklist. Reliability evidence was predominantly estimated using internal consistency; validity evidence was limited, and responsiveness was seldom examined. Overall, quality ratings were poor or inadequately reported and serious methodological limitations were identified. A lack of conceptual foundation quality ratings as tools did not apply a theory related to motivation or have a clear definition of the construct of patient motivation. CONCLUSIONS: A significant gap exists of available tools with adequate measurement properties that use relevant theoretical frameworks.

Developing the Evidence Base for M-Learning in Undergraduate Radiology Education: Identifying Learner Preferences for Mobile Apps.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of evidence for developing radiology mobile apps for medical students. This study identifies the characteristics which students perceive as most valuable to teaching radiology with mobile apps (m-learning). METHODS: An online anonymous survey was administered to second- to fourth-year medical students at a single institution. The survey, which was based on established theoretical framework, collected students' preferred content organization, content presentation, and delivery strategies. The Copeland method was used to rank student preferences and a 2-tailed t test was used to determine if student responses were related to their clinical experience, with statistical significance at P < .05. RESULTS: The response rate was 25.6% (163/635). For content organization, image interpretation (66.9%), imaging anatomy (61.3%), and common pathological conditions (50.3%) were selected as the most important. For content presentation, quizzes (49.1%) and case presentations (46.0%) were selected as the most useful. Students with clinical experience rated algorithms as more important (P < .01) and quizzes as less important (P = .03). For delivery strategies, ease of use (92.6%), navigation (90.8%), and gestural design (74.8%) were deemed the most applicable. CONCLUSION: This study documents medical students' preferences for m-learning in radiology. Although learner preferences are not the only feature to consider in the development of educational technology, these provide the initial framework for radiologists wishing to develop and incorporate mobile apps into their teaching.