questionnaires

问卷调查
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:患者报告的结果测量(PROM)现在是耳鼻喉科临床和学术实践的组成部分,并且必须有经过验证的法语版本的工具。然而,没有法语或可能具有跨文化适应的ENT问卷的指南。
    方法:本研究,在耳鼻喉科国家专业委员会和法国耳鼻喉科协会的主持下,库存的PROM,对于每个超级专业和病理学,符合以下纳入标准之一:经过验证的法语版本,未翻译但在国际上使用(即,翻译成其他语言,自2017年以来被广泛引用),或主观上被有关超级专业的专家认为是有用的。
    结果:总计,确定了103份问卷。鼓励和伴随他们的跨文化适应和统计验证,本文介绍了这项工作的原理和方法。
    结论:已经用法语验证或翻译有用的PROM已被清点。提出了确保可靠性和相关性的翻译和验证方法。
    OBJECTIVE: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are now an integral part of clinical and academic practice in ENT, and it is essential to have tools with a validated French version. However, there are no guidelines on ENT questionnaires available in French or those that could have transcultural adaptation.
    METHODS: The present study, under the auspices of the ENT National Professional Council and the French Society of ENT, inventoried PROMs, for each super-specialty and pathology, meeting one of the following inclusion criteria: validated French version, not translated but used internationally (i.e., translated into other languages and widely cited since 2017), or subjectively deemed useful by experts in the super-specialty in question.
    RESULTS: In total, 103 questionnaires were identified. To encourage and accompany their intercultural adaptation and statistical validation, this article presents the rationale and methodology of such an undertaking.
    CONCLUSIONS: PROMs either already validated in French or which it would be useful to translate were inventoried. The methodology of translation and validation to guarantee reliability and relevance is presented.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    肺血栓内膜切除术(PTE)是当前慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压(CTEPH)的黄金标准治疗方法,并且是慢性血栓栓塞性肺病(CTEPD)的可行治疗选择。这两种疾病的进行性性质严重影响了各个领域的健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)。这项系统评价旨在评估PTE对短期和长期HRQoL的影响。在PubMed上进行了文献检索,寻找符合2000年1月至2022年9月资格标准的研究。OVID(MEDLINE),谷歌学者,EBSCOhost(EMBASE),并对纳入研究的参考书目进行了综述。纳入研究是基于预定的资格标准。使用预定表格进行质量评估和数据制表。结果通过叙述性综述进行综合。本系统综述的结构遵循PRISMA指南。该系统评价预期在PROSPERO登记册(CRD42022342144)中注册。共纳入13项研究(2184例患者)。PTE后3个月内,通过疾病特异性和通用问卷测量,CTEPD和CTEPH的HRQoL均有所改善。PTE后CTEPH患者的HRQoL改善持续至术后5年。PTE仍然是治疗CTEPH和改善HRQoL的金标准。随着时间的推移,残留的肺动脉高压和COPD和冠状动脉疾病等合并症会降低HRQoL。mPAP和PVR对术后HRQoL结果的影响仍然不明确。肺血栓内膜切除术仍然是治疗CTEPH的金标准,并已显示在术后3个月持续改善至5年时可改善HRQoL结果。残余肺动脉高压和合并症阻碍PTE后HRQoL结果。
    Pulmonary thromboendarterectomy (PTE) is the current gold standard treatment for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and is a viable treatment option for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary disease (CTEPD). The progressive nature of both diseases severely impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL) across a variety of domains. This systematic review was performed to evaluate the impact of PTE on short- and long-term HRQoL. A literature search was conducted on PubMed for studies matching the eligibility criteria between January 2000 and September 2022. OVID (MEDLINE), Google Scholar, EBSCOhost (EMBASE), and bibliographies of included studies were reviewed. Inclusion of studies was based on predetermined eligibility criteria. Quality appraisal and data tabulation were performed using predetermined forms. Results were synthesized by narrative review. The structure of this systematic review follows the PRISMA guidelines. This systematic review was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO register (CRD42022342144). Thirteen studies (2184 patients) were included. Within 3 months post-PTE, HRQoL improved in both CTEPD and CTEPH as measured by disease-specific and generic questionnaires. HRQoL improvements were sustained up to 5 years postoperatively in patients with CTEPH post-PTE. PTE remains the gold standard for treating CTEPH and improving HRQoL. Residual pulmonary hypertension and comorbidities such as COPD and coronary artery disease decrement HRQoL over time. The impact of mPAP and PVR on HRQoL outcomes postoperatively remain ambiguous. Pulmonary thromboendarterectomy remains the gold standard for treating CTEPH and has shown to improve HRQoL outcomes at 3-month sustaining improvements up to 5-year postoperatively. Residual pulmonary hypertension and comorbidities hinder HRQoL outcomes post-PTE.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    下腰痛(LBP)是最常见的致残疾病之一。这种残疾显著降低了LBP患者的生活质量。本文回顾了目前用于评估LBP残疾的最常见和众所周知的措施。例如Oswestry残疾指数(ODI),罗兰-莫里斯残疾问卷(RMDQ),魁北克背痛残疾量表(QBPDS),低背部结果得分(LBOS),和腰背痛评定量表(LBPRS)。为了可靠地评估问卷和其他测量方法,有一些被称为心理测量属性的参数,主要包括有效性,可靠性和灵敏度。这些方法基于由患者独立完成的评估身体功能的多项目问卷。它们可用于评估与许多条件相关的残疾。所有这些都是LBP特有的,他们的心理测量特性已经在相关的患者人群中进行了测试,并发表在同行评审的出版物中。
    Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common disabling conditions. This disability significantly reduces the quality of life of LBP patients. This article reviews the most common and well-known measures currently used to assess disability in LBP, such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS), the Low Back Outcome Score (LBOS), and the Low Back Pain Rating Scale (LBPRS). To reliably evaluate questionnaires and other measurement methods, there are parameters known as psychometric properties, which consist primarily of the validity, reliability and sensitivity. These methods are based on a multi-item questionnaire assessing physical functioning that is completed independently by the patient. They can be used to assess the disability associated with many conditions. All are specific to LBP, and their psychometric properties have been tested on a relevant population of patients with the condition and published in peer-reviewed publications.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    学习环境(LE)包括社交互动,组织文化,结构,以及影响学生学习体验的物理和虚拟空间。尽管有许多研究探索了医疗保健专业学生(HCPS)对LE的看法,使用问卷的有效性证据尚不清楚.此范围审查旨在确定用于检查本科生HCPS对LE的看法并评估其有效性证据的问卷。使用了五个关键概念:(1)高等教育;(2)问卷调查;(3)LE;(4)感知;(5)卫生专业(HP)。PubMed,ERIC,ProQuest,并在Cochrane数据库中搜索开发或调整问卷以检查LE的研究。这篇综述采用了APERA有效性证据标准和Beckman等人。(JGenInternMed20:1159-1164,2005)根据5类解释本标准:内容,内部结构,响应过程,与其他变量的关系,和后果。在本次审查中包含的41份问卷中,分析显示,主要强调内容和内部结构类别。然而,所包括的问卷中只有不到10%提供了与其他变量相关的信息,后果,和响应过程类别。大多数确定的问卷在医学和护理领域得到了广泛的覆盖,其次是牙科。这篇评论确定了各种问卷,用于检查学生对不同HP的LE的看法。鉴于现有问卷的有效性证据有限,未来的研究应该优先考虑心理测量的发展和验证。这将最终确保HP教育计划中LE的合理和基于证据的质量改进措施。
    The learning environment (LE) includes social interactions, organizational culture, structures, and physical and virtual spaces that influence the learning experiences of students. Despite numerous studies exploring the perception of healthcare professional students (HCPS) of their LE, the validity evidence of the utilized questionnaires remains unclear. This scoping review aimed to identify questionnaires used to examine the perception of undergraduate HCPS of their LE and to assess their validity evidence. Five key concepts were used: (1) higher education; (2) questionnaire; (3) LE; (4) perception; and (5) health professions (HP). PubMed, ERIC, ProQuest, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies developing or adapting questionnaires to examine LE. This review employed the APERA standards of validity evidence and Beckman et al. (J Gen Intern Med 20:1159-1164, 2005) interpretation of these standards according to 5 categories: content, internal structure, response process, relation to other variables, and consequences. Out of 41 questionnaires included in this review, the analysis revealed a predominant emphasis on content and internal structure categories. However, less than 10% of the included questionnaires provided information in relation to other variables, consequences, and response process categories. Most of the identified questionnaires received extensive coverage in the fields of medicine and nursing, followed by dentistry. This review identified diverse questionnaires utilized for examining the perception of students of their LE across different HPs. Given the limited validity evidence for existing questionnaires, future research should prioritize the development and validation of psychometric measures. This will ultimately ensure sound and evidence-based quality improvement measures of the LE in HP education programs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:SCOFF问卷设计为一个简单的,令人难忘的筛查工具,以引起人们对一个人可能患有饮食失调的怀疑。自SCOFF成立以来已有20多年了,在此期间,它被广泛使用。考虑到这一点,我们希望回顾一下SCOFF在同行评审科学期刊中的使用情况,并评估它是否以最初设计和测试的方式被适当地使用。
    方法:遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目,所有的搜索策略和方法均在研究开始前确定。使用术语SCOFF和饮食搜索PubMed和Wiley在线图书馆。两名审稿人参与了审查过程。适当使用SCOFF的标准由该工具的原始作者正式确定。
    结果:180篇文章被纳入最终综述。48篇文章适当地使用了SCOFF,117篇文章不适当,15篇文章在使用的适当性方面混合在一起。
    结论:本系统综述强调了SCOFF在不同语言和环境中的不当使用。正确使用时,SCOFF对饮食失调的理解做出了重大贡献,其简单性受到称赞并导致广泛使用。然而,在超过三分之二的研究中,SCOFF的使用是不合适的,论文强调了它是如何以及以何种方式被滥用的,说明了适当使用SCOFF的指南。提出了未来的验证和研究途径。
    方法:一级
    OBJECTIVE: The SCOFF questionnaire was designed as a simple, memorable screening tool to raise suspicion that a person might have an eating disorder. It is over 20 years since the creation of the SCOFF, during which time it has been widely used. Considering this, we wish to review the use of the SCOFF in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and to assess whether it is being used appropriately in the manner in which it was originally devised and tested.
    METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and all search strategies and methods were determined before the onset of the study. PubMed and Wiley Online Library were searched using the terms SCOFF and eating. Two reviewers were involved in the reviewing process. Criteria for appropriate use of the SCOFF were formalised with the tool\'s original authors.
    RESULTS: 180 articles were included in the final review. 48 articles had used the SCOFF appropriately, 117 articles inappropriately and 15 articles had been mixed in the appropriateness of their use.
    CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the inappropriate use of the SCOFF in diverse languages and settings. When used correctly the SCOFF has made a significant contribution to the understanding of eating disorders and its simplicity has been applauded and led to widespread use. However in over two-thirds of studies, the use of the SCOFF was inappropriate and the paper highlights how and in what way it was misused, Guidelines for the appropriate use of the SCOFF are stated. Future validation and avenues of research are suggested.
    METHODS: Level I.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    今天,各种问卷可用于评估儿童的不良童年经历(ACE);然而,尚不确定这些问卷是否能全面解决弱势群体的逆境问题,特别是难民儿童。本次审查的目标是(1)确定当前的ACE问卷,并确定它们是否适合评估难民儿童的逆境,(2)确定以前在难民人口中使用的那些。自2010年以来发表的文章在五个数据库中进行了系统的文献检索,其中包括使用ACE问卷的研究,该问卷识别了健康儿童的多种逆境并以英语发表。在506项研究中,共确定了103份ACE问卷。103份问卷中只有14份涉及难民特有的逆境。他们捕捉难民儿童经历的能力是有限的:可用的问卷最多使用三个项目来评估难民特有的逆境,仅涵盖与难民儿童相关的一小部分形式的逆境。很少报道心理测量特征。此外,在难民人口中只使用了两份ACE问卷。有了当前可用的工具,不可能全面评估难民儿童面临的逆境和严重程度。持续不断的危机需要评估难民儿童的逆境,以了解他们的福祉如何受到影响,并确定处于危险中的儿童。
    Today, various questionnaires are available to assess Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) in children; however, it is uncertain if these questionnaires are comprehensive in addressing adversities of vulnerable subgroups, specifically refugee children. This review\'s objectives are to (1) identify current ACE questionnaires and determine if they are suitable in assessing refugee children\'s adversities, and (2) identify those previously used within a refugee population. A systematic literature search was conducted across five databases for articles published since 2010, including studies using an ACE-questionnaire that recognized multiple adversities in healthy children and were published in English. A total of 103 ACE questionnaires were identified in 506 studies. Only 14 of the 103 questionnaires addressed a refugee-specific adversity. Their ability to capture refugee children\'s experiences was limited: available questionnaires used a maximum of three items to assess refugee-specific adversities, covering only a fraction of forms of adversities relevant to refugee children. Psychometric characteristics were rarely reported. In addition, only two ACE questionnaires were used within a refugee population. With the tools currently available, it is not possible to comprehensively assess the exposure to and severity of the adversities faced by refugee children. The perpetuation of ongoing crises necessitates assessing refugee children\'s adversities to understand how their wellbeing is affected and to identify children at risk.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    简介:远程医疗作为远程提供医疗保健的有效手段,已获得广泛关注,特别是在COVID-19大流行期间。患者满意度是实施远程医疗的关键方面,但是我们对满意度和相关因素没有全面的了解。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估与远程医疗咨询相关的患者满意度,并确定影响满意度水平的关键因素。结果:搜索共产生了147项横断面研究,其中107人符合纳入荟萃分析的标准。总的来说,患者对远程会诊的满意度很高,满意度从38到100,从0到100。只有一小部分(2.72%)的研究报告满意度低于75%。令人惊讶的是,大多数研究使用未经验证的满意度问卷,这突出了发展标准化测量仪器的必要性。结论:本系统综述和荟萃分析提供了证据,表明患者通常对远程医疗咨询表现出很高的满意度。在许多研究中使用未经验证的满意度问卷,然而,这表明需要更标准化的评估工具。咨询和评估之间的时间间隔等因素会影响满意度。了解这些因素可以帮助医疗保健提供者改善远程医疗服务和患者与提供者的关系,并在远程医疗的背景下优化医疗保健服务。有必要进行进一步的研究,以开发经过验证的满意度测量工具,并探索影响患者对远程医疗满意度的任何其他因素。
    Introduction: Telemedicine has gained significant attention as an effective means of providing health care remotely, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient satisfaction is a critical aspect of implementing telemedicine, but we have no comprehensive understanding of satisfaction levels and the associated factors. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess patient satisfaction related to telemedicine consultations and to identify key factors influencing satisfaction levels. Results: The search yielded a total of 147 cross-sectional studies, of which 107 met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Overall, patient satisfaction with teleconsultations was found to be high, with satisfaction levels ranging from 38 to 100 on a scale of 0 to 100. Only a small percentage (2.72%) of the studies reported satisfaction levels below 75%. Surprisingly, most studies used nonvalidated satisfaction questionnaires, which highlight the need for the development of standardized measurement instruments. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide evidence that patients generally exhibit high levels of satisfaction with telemedicine consultations. The use of nonvalidated satisfaction questionnaires in many studies, however, suggests a need for more standardized assessment tools. Factors such as the time interval between the consultation and the assessment were found to influence satisfaction levels. Understanding these factors can help health care providers improve telemedicine services and patient-provider relationships and optimize health care delivery in the context of telemedicine. Further research is warranted to develop validated satisfaction measurement instruments and explore any additional factors that influence patient satisfaction with telemedicine.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    2012年CRISPR-Cas9的出现,通过扩大对精确修饰人类基因组的方法的获取范围,开始彻底改变遗传学领域。它还使人们重新关注遗传修饰的伦理问题以及社会对这一目的技术的接受。到目前为止,世界各地都进行了许多评估公众对转基因态度的调查。这里,我们提供了对主要调查出版物的系统审查结果,这些出版物涉及公众对基因改造的态度以及对基因改造所需技术的认识和知识。总共确定了53种主要出版物(1987-2020年),重点是在人类和非人类动物中的应用,覆盖四大洲的国家。在53项研究中,直到2012年(CRISPR之前)的30项研究涉及人类的基因治疗以及用于食品生产和生物医学研究的动物的遗传修饰。2013年后的其余23项研究(CRISPR)涉及人类和动物的基因编辑。在各个国家,受访者认为基因治疗用于人类疾病治疗或预防是可取的和高度可接受的,而增强通常会遭到反对。当研究区分体细胞和种系应用时,体细胞基因编辑被普遍接受,而种系应用遇到矛盾。该应用程序的目的对于评估对转基因动物的态度也很重要:在CRISPR之前的研究中,食品生产中的修饰比生物医学应用少得多。通常存在知识/意识与对遗传修饰的态度之间的关系。关于抽样和问卷设计,对主要出版物的方法质量进行严格评估,发展,行政管理表明,在报告方法细节方面还有相当大的改进余地。缺乏信息在早期的研究中更为常见,这可能反映了该领域不断变化的实践。
    The advent of CRISPR-Cas9 in 2012 started revolutionizing the field of genetics by broadening the access to a method for precise modification of the human genome. It also brought renewed attention to the ethical issues of genetic modification and the societal acceptance of technology for this purpose. So far, many surveys assessing public attitudes toward genetic modification have been conducted worldwide. Here, we present the results of a systematic review of primary publications of surveys addressing public attitudes toward genetic modification as well as the awareness and knowledge about the technology required for genetic modification. A total of 53 primary publications (1987-2020) focusing on applications in humans and non-human animals were identified, covering countries in four continents. Of the 53 studies, 30 studies from until and including 2012 (pre-CRISPR) address gene therapy in humans and genetic modification of animals for food production and biomedical research. The remaining 23 studies from after 2013 (CRISPR) address gene editing in humans and animals. Across countries, respondents see gene therapy for disease treatment or prevention in humans as desirable and highly acceptable, whereas enhancement is generally met with opposition. When the study distinguishes between somatic and germline applications, somatic gene editing is generally accepted, whereas germline applications are met with ambivalence. The purpose of the application is also important for assessing attitudes toward genetically modified animals: modification in food production is much less accepted than for biomedical application in pre-CRISPR studies. A relationship between knowledge/awareness and attitude toward genetic modification is often present. A critical appraisal of methodology quality in the primary publications with regards to sampling and questionnaire design, development, and administration shows that there is considerable scope for improvement in the reporting of methodological detail. Lack of information is more common in earlier studies, which probably reflects the changing practice in the field.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    该研究旨在回顾亚洲不同国家的一般和具体健康素养研究,以了解该地区健康素养研究的进展。通过在PubMed中进行系统搜索,收集了英语发表的对健康素养进行定量测量的研究,科克伦图书馆,Embase,和WebofScience,没有发布日期限制。关于一般健康素养的文章共156篇,口服,心理,疾病特异性健康素养,收集了电子健康素养。一般健康素养是89篇文章中涵盖最多的主题,其次是电子健康素养。已经在16个国家进行了健康素养研究,并且在亚洲大多数国家越来越受到关注。中国的文章数量最多,其次是台湾。四项研究的参与者来自一个以上的国家。教育,年龄,健康状况,收入,在156项研究中,居住区和居住区与健康素养水平显着相关,患病率为55.8%,28.2%,20.5%,17.9%,10.9%,分别。在71项研究中,较低的健康素养与较差的健康结果或较低的生活质量有关。
    The study aimed to review general and specific health literacy studies in different countries in Asia to understand the progress of health literacy researches in the region. English-published studies with quantitative measurements of health literacy were collected through a systematic search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, without publication dates limitation. A total of 156 articles on general health literacy, oral, mental, disease-specific health literacy, and eHealth literacy were collected. General health literacy was the most covered topic in 89 articles, followed by eHealth Literacy. Health literacy studies have been conducted in 16 countries and have been increasingly concerned in most of the countries in Asia. China had the largest number of articles, followed by Taiwan. Four studies had participants from more than one country. Education, age, health status, incomes, and living/residential area were significantly associated with health literacy levels in 156 studies, with the prevalence of 55.8%, 28.2%, 20.5%, 17.9%, and 10.9%, respectively. Lower health literacy was related to poorer health outcomes or lower quality of life in 71 studies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    跌倒筛查工具旨在准确识别高跌倒风险个体。为了提高管理的便利性和成本效益,许多研究都集中在基于问题的工具上。本系统评价的目的是确定60岁以上社区居住老年人跌倒风险评估的基于问题的工具以及这些工具涵盖的风险因素。遵循PRISMA准则。在PubMed/MEDLINE进行了文献检索,WebofScience和谷歌学者。使用渥太华-纽卡斯尔量表进行数据质量评估。结果确定了20项研究,这些研究使用了22种基于问题的工具来评估跌倒风险。每个工具的问题数量从1到41个问题不等。数据质量差异很大,队列研究的值为3-9,横断面研究的值为2-7。最常见的跌倒风险因素是跌倒史,不稳定的感觉,害怕跌倒,肌肉力量,步态限制和失禁。医疗保健提供者应谨慎使用上述工具,注意每种工具的局限性。应该设计进一步的研究来解决高跌倒风险的个人,比如有认知障碍的人,因为它们代表性不足或被排除在大多数现有研究之外。
    Fall screening tools aim to accurately identify the high fall risk individuals. To increase ease of administration and cost-effectiveness many studies focus on question-based tools. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify question-based tools for fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults over the age of 60 and the risk factors that are covered by these tools. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. A literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Data quality assessment was performed with the Ottawa-Newcastle scale. The results identified 20 studies that used 22 question-based tools to assess fall risk. The number of questions per tool varied from 1 to 41 questions. Data quality varied greatly, with values 3-9 for cohort and 2-7 for cross-sectional studies. The most commonly reported fall risk factors were fall history, feeling of unsteadiness, fear of falling, muscle strength, gait limitation and incontinence. Healthcare providers should use the above tools with caution regarding the limitations of each tool. Further studies should be designed to address individuals with high fall risk, such as individuals with cognitive impairment, as they are under-represented or excluded from most of the existing studies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号