背景:修订后的患者对去处方的态度(rPATD)问卷旨在获取患者对去处方的信念和看法。总的来说,在调查研究中,对缺失数据的处理被低估了。与缺失数据相关的潜在机制可能会影响调查研究的结果。
目的:本研究的目的是通过系统评价和两项研究的数据集,使用rPATD问卷评估研究中缺失的数据。
方法:首先,这篇综述更新了rPATD(和其他版本)的系统综述.我们通过OVID搜索了Medline,EMBASE,Scopus,WebofScience至2023年1月31日。收集了缺失的数据报告和处理方法。第二,使用三种缺失数据处理方法分析了两项去处方研究的数据:完整病例分析,个人均值替代,和多重归责。我们将每个领域的分数和领域的关联与rPATD的两个问题进行了比较,以强调使用不同的方法如何影响研究结果的解释。
结果:我们确定了49项研究:31项(63%)来自本研究,18项(37%)来自最初的系统评价。在9项研究中(18.4%)可以确定缺失数据最多的问题或领域。19项研究报告了数据管理缺失(38.8%)。在一个案例分析中,“负担”域与以下问题显着相关:“我想尝试停止我的一种药物,看看没有它我的感受”,使用完整的案例分析(p=0.044)或多重归因(p=0.038),但在使用个人平均替代时并非如此(p=0.057)。
结论:在使用rPATD问卷的研究中,缺失数据和处理缺失数据的方法被低估。应谨慎选择方法,因为我们从两项不同的研究中进行的分析表明,它们可能会影响对问卷结果的解释。
BACKGROUND: The revised Patients\' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD)
questionnaire was developed to capture beliefs and perceptions of patients about deprescribing. In general, handling of missing data is underreported in survey studies. Underlying mechanisms related to missing data may impact the findings from survey studies.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the missing data in studies using the rPATD
questionnaire through a systematic review and datasets from two studies.
METHODS: First, this review updated a systematic review on the rPATD (and other versions). We searched Medline via OVID, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science until 31st January 2023. Missing data reporting and methods to handle them were collected. Second, data from two deprescribing studies were analyzed using three methods of missing data handling: complete
case analysis, personal mean substitution, and multiple imputation. We compared the scores from each domain and the associations of the domains with two questions from the rPATD to highlight how using different methods can influence the interpretation of study findings.
RESULTS: We identified 49 studies: 31 (63 %) from this study and 18 (37 %) from the original systematic review. The question or domain with the most missing data could be identified in 9 studies (18.4 %). Missing data management was reported in 19 studies (38.8 %). In one
case analysis, the \"Burden\" domain was significantly associated with the question \"I would like to try stopping one of my medicines to see how I feel without it\" using complete
case analysis (p = 0.044) or multiple imputation (p = 0.038), but not when using personal mean substitution (p = 0.057).
CONCLUSIONS: Missing data and methods used to handle missing data were underreported in studies using the rPATD questionnaire. The methods should be chosen carefully as our analyses from two distinct studies suggest that they may impact the interpretation of the findings from the questionnaire.