ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2016
The Development and Validation of a Generic Instrument, QoDoS, for Assessing the Quality of Decision Making.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Quality Decision-Making Practices Utilized by the Zambia Medicines Regulatory Authority Technical Committees.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond the Pill: Mapping Process-Oriented Decision Support Models in Pharmaceutical Policy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Suggested Improvements to the Current East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization Joint Review Process and a Proposed New Review Model for this Initiative.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Article
- The influence of emotional labor and emotional intelligence on cesarean section decision-making among midwives and obstetricians in Kosovo: A cross-sectional study using conjoint analysis.European journal of midwifery · 2025Article
- Comparison of good review practices of seven countries participating in the ECOWAS medicines regulatory harmonisation initiative: identifying opportunities for improvement.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- A Proposed Regulatory Review Model to Support the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority to Become a More Efficient and Effective Agency.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- A Process for Evaluating Quality Decision-Making Practices During the Development, Review and Reimbursement of Medicines.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Innovation in physical education: The role of cognitive factors and self-efficacy.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the Good Review Practices of Countries Participating in the Southern African Development Community: Alignment and Strategies for Moving Forward.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- South African Regulatory Authority: The Impact of Reliance on the Review Process Leading to Improved Patient Access.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Quality Decision-Making Practices in Pharmaceutical Companies and Regulatory Authorities: Current and Proposed Approaches to Its Documentation.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Performance of the Turkish Regulatory Agency: Recommendations for Improved Patients' Access to Medicines.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- The Reliability and Relevance of a Quality of Decision Making Instrument, Quality of Decision-Making Orientation Scheme (QoDoS), for Use During the Lifecycle of Medicines.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Evaluating Quality of Decision-Making Processes in Medicines' Development, Regulatory Review, and Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe impact of decision-making during the development and the regulatory review of medicines greatly influences the delivery of new medicinal products. Currently, there is no generic instrument that can be used to assess the quality of decision-making. This study describes the development of the Quality of Decision-Making Orientation Scheme QoDoS(©) instrument for appraising the quality of decision-making.
methodsSemi-structured interviews about decision-making were carried out with 29 senior decision makers from the pharmaceutical industry (10), regulatory authorities (9) and contract research organizations (10). The interviews offered a qualified understanding of the subjective decision-making approach, influences, behaviors and other factors that impact such processes for individuals and organizations involved in the delivery of new medicines. Thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews was carried out using NVivo8® software. Content validity was carried out using qualitative and quantitative data by an expert panel, which led to the developmental version of the QoDoS. Further psychometric evaluations were performed, including factor analysis, item reduction, reliability testing and construct validation.
resultsThe thematic analysis of the interviews yielded a 94-item initial version of the QoDoS(©) with a 5-point Likert scale. The instrument was tested for content validity using a panel of experts for language clarity, completeness, relevance and scaling, resulting in a favorable agreement by panel members with an intra-class correlation coefficient value of 0.89 (95% confidence interval = 0.56, 0.99). A 76-item QoDoS(©) (version 2) emerged from content validation. Factor analysis produced a 47-item measure with four domains. The 47-item QoDoS(©) (version 3) showed high internal consistency (n = 120, Cronbach's alpha = 0.89), high reproducibility (n = 20, intra-class correlation = 0.77) and a mean completion time of 10 min. Reliability testing and construct validation was successfully performed.
conclusionThe QoDoS(©) is both reliable and valid for use. It has the potential for extensive use in medicines development by both the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory authorities. The QoDoS(©) can be used to assess the quality of decision-making and to inform decision makers of the factors that influence decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.