informed decision making

知情决策
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:宫颈癌是英格兰25-29岁的年轻女性中常见的癌症,NHS宫颈筛查传单是被邀请进行首次筛查的人的第一个接触点。这项研究旨在探讨年轻女性(18-24岁)如何理解和参与传单,以及与解释相关的障碍和促进者,订婚,和筛选意图。
    方法:研究采用混合方法,包括一项调查(n=120),以确定解释困难以及它们如何受到不同特征的影响,并进行后续访谈(n=10)以评估传单的实用性,找出其实用性的问题,并确定影响筛查意图的因素。
    结果:调查结果显示,口译困难很普遍,特别是关于HPV评估,筛选结果,额外的测试/治疗,筛查风险。较低的解释准确性与较低的算术分数和非白人种族有关。尽管有这些困难,参与者有很高的信心和动力参与传单。采访揭示了知识差距,传单的实用性问题,以及对数字信息的偏好。被确定为传单解释的障碍和促进因素,订婚,筛选意图包括知识,社会影响力,关于后果的信念,环境背景和资源,社会角色和身份,情感和意图。
    结论:当前的传单没有为年轻女性提供足够的信息来做出有关筛查出勤率的明智决定。实施具有简化要点表示的数字邀请,有针对性的行为改变技术(BCT),视频,互动工具可以加强教育和促进筛查行为。未来的研究应该考虑使用数字工具和策略来解决与解释和参与相关的现有障碍。
    BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a common cancer among young women aged 25-29 in England, and the NHS cervical screening leaflet is the first point of contact for those being invited for their first screening. This study aimed to explore how young women (18-24) understand and engage with the leaflet, as well as the barriers and facilitators associated with its interpretation, engagement, and screening intentions.
    METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods approach, including a survey (n = 120) to identify interpretation difficulties and how they were affected by different characteristics, and a follow-up interview (n = 10) to assess the utility of the leaflet, identify issues with its practicality, and determine the factors that influence screening intentions.
    RESULTS: The survey results showed that interpretation difficulties were common, particularly regarding HPV assessment, screening results, additional tests/treatment, and screening risks. Lower interpretation accuracy was associated with lower numeracy scores and non-white ethnicity. Despite these difficulties, participants had high confidence and motivation to engage with the leaflet. The interviews revealed knowledge gaps, issues with the leaflet\'s practicality, and a preference for digital information. Factors that were identified as barriers and facilitators of leaflet interpretation, engagement, and screening intentions included knowledge, social influence, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, social role and identity, emotions and intentions.
    CONCLUSIONS: The current leaflet does not provide enough information for young women to make an informed decision about screening attendance. Implementing a digital invitation featuring simplified gist representation, targeted behaviour change techniques (BCTs), videos, and interactive tools can enhance education and promote screening behaviour. Future research should consider using digital tools and strategies to address existing barriers related to interpretation and engagement.
    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
    背景:先前的研究表明,与健康相关的直接面向消费者的基因检测(DTC-GT)的卖家提供的信息通常是不完整的,不平衡,或者太难理解。以前没有研究过荷兰消费者可以接触到的卖家的情况。方法和目标:本研究旨在评估完整性,balance,可读性,以及荷兰消费者可以访问的一些与健康相关的DTC-GT卖家的精选网站上的信息内容的可查找性。根据最近发布的清单进行了深入的内容分析,该清单概述了有关DTC-GT服务的政策指导的关键项目。结果:卖方提供的信息并未平等地涵盖与健康相关的DTC-GT服务提供相关的所有方面。所提供的资料稍有不平衡,与健康相关的DTC-GT使用的好处相比,其风险和局限性被过分强调。所提供资料的可读性较低,平均而言,需要大学教育才能正确理解。可查找性分析表明,有关所有主题的信息在经过分析的卖家网站上总体上相对均匀地分布。结论:与健康相关的DTC-GT卖家提供的信息在完整性方面是次优的,balance,和可读性。为了更好地授权潜在消费者就与健康相关的DTC-GT的使用做出明智的决定,我们主张在全行业范围内加强信息提供。
    Background: Previous studies have suggested that information offered by sellers of health-related direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GTs) is often incomplete, unbalanced, or too difficult to understand. The extent to which this is the case for sellers accessible to Dutch consumers has not previously been studied. Methods and Goals: The present study aimed to assess the completeness, balance, readability, and findability of informational content on a selection of websites from several health-related DTC-GT sellers accessible to Dutch consumers. An in-depth content analysis was performed based on a recently published checklist outlining key items for policy guidance regarding DTC-GT services. Results: The information provided by sellers did not equally cover all aspects relevant to health-related DTC-GT service provision. The provided information was slightly unbalanced, with benefits of health-related DTC-GT usage being overemphasized compared to its risks and limitations. The readability of the provided information was low, on average requiring college education for proper understanding. A findability analysis showed that information concerning all themes is overall relatively evenly distributed across analyzed sellers\' websites. Conclusions: Information provision by assessed health-related DTC-GT sellers is suboptimal regarding completeness, balance, and readability. To better empower potential consumers to make an informed decision regarding health-related DTC-GT usage, we advocate industry-wide enhancement of information provision.
    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
    背景:澳大利亚指南建议50-70岁的人考虑服用低剂量阿司匹林以降低其结直肠癌(CRC)的风险。
    目的:确定在一般实践中使用决策辅助工具与研究人员进行咨询的效果,该决策辅助工具介绍了与一般CRC预防手册相比,服用低剂量阿司匹林对患者的明智决策和低剂量阿司匹林的使用的益处和危害。
    方法:在维多利亚州的六个一般实践中进行的单独随机对照试验,澳大利亚,从2020年10月到2021年3月。
    方法:参与者从50-70岁参加GP的患者的连续样本中招募。干预是使用决策援助的咨询,讨论服用阿司匹林以降低CRC风险,而对照咨询则讨论降低CRC风险。自我报告的共同主要结果是在1个月时对服用阿司匹林和6个月时服用低剂量阿司匹林做出知情选择的个体比例。分别。使用广义线性模型估计干预效果,并用Bonferroni调整的95%置信区间(CI)和P值报告。
    结果:共有261名参与者(86%的合格患者)被随机分配到试验组(n=129干预;n=132对照)。在这些参与者中,干预组的17.7%(n=20/113)和对照组的7.6%(n=9/118)报告在1个月时对服用阿司匹林做出了明智的选择。估计的9.1%(95%CI=0.29~18.5)的组间比例差异(比值比[OR]2.47,97.5%CI=0.94~6.52,P=0.074).6个月时报告服用阿司匹林的个体比例为干预组的10.2%(n=12/118),对照组为13.8%(n=16/116)。估计的臂间差异为-4.0%(95%CI=-13.5至5.5;OR0.68[97.5%CI=0.27至1.70,P=0.692])。
    结论:决策辅助改善了知情决策,但这并不能转化为长期定期使用阿司匹林来降低CRC风险。在未来的研究中,决策辅助工具应与各种实施策略一起提供。
    BACKGROUND: Australian guidelines recommend that people aged 50-70 years consider taking low-dose aspirin to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC).
    OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a consultation with a researcher before an appointment in general practice using a decision aid presenting the benefits and harms of taking low-dose aspirin compared with a general CRC prevention brochure on patients\' informed decision making and low-dose aspirin use.
    METHODS: Individually randomised controlled trial in six general practices in Victoria, Australia, from October 2020 to March 2021.
    METHODS: Participants were recruited from a consecutive sample of patients aged 50-70 years attending a GP. The intervention was a consultation using a decision aid to discuss taking aspirin to reduce CRC risk while control consultations discussed reducing CRC risk generally. Self-reported co-primary outcomes were the proportion of individuals making informed choices about taking aspirin at 1 month and on low-dose aspirin uptake at 6 months, respectively. The intervention effect was estimated using a generalised linear model and reported with Bonferroni-adjusted 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values.
    RESULTS: A total of 261 participants (86% of eligible patients) were randomised into trial arms (n = 129 intervention; n = 132 control). Of these participants, 17.7% (n = 20/113) in the intervention group and 7.6% (n = 9/118) in the control group reported making an informed choice about taking aspirin at 1 month, an estimated 9.1% (95% CI = 0.29 to 18.5) between-arm difference in proportions (odds ratio [OR] 2.47, 97.5% CI = 0.94 to 6.52, P = 0.074). The proportions of individuals who reported taking aspirin at 6 months were 10.2% (n = 12/118) of the intervention group versus 13.8% (n = 16/116) of the control group, an estimated between-arm difference of -4.0% (95% CI = -13.5 to 5.5; OR 0.68 [97.5% CI = 0.27 to 1.70, P = 0.692]).
    CONCLUSIONS: The decision aid improved informed decision making but this did not translate into long-term regular use of aspirin to reduce CRC risk. In future research, decision aids should be delivered alongside various implementation strategies.
    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
    背景:基于风险的乳腺癌(BC)筛查在信息提供和风险沟通方面提出了新的问题。本研究旨在:1)调查女性的信仰和知识(即,心理模型)关于BC风险和(基于风险的)BC筛查,以考虑对信息开发的影响;2)开发新的信息材料,以传达基于风险的BC筛查中的筛查结果,包括定量和定性信息的风险可视化,以人为中心的设计视角。
    方法:第一阶段:进行访谈(n=15,40-50年,5个较低的健康素养)关于女性对BC风险和(基于风险的)BC筛查的信念。第二阶段:在三个参与式设计会议中,女性(n=4-6次会议,40-50年,2-3个较低的健康素养)进行了分配,并创建和评估了以筛查结果为中心的风险信息的可视化。原型在另外两个会议中进行了评估(n=2,54-62年,0-1个较低的健康素养)。第3阶段:专家(n=5)和妇女(n=9,40-74岁)评估了所得材料。在整个开发过程中,还咨询了另外两名专家,以确保信息材料的内容准确。访谈从字面上进行转录,并使用定性主题分析进行分析,关注对信息发展的影响。Notes,总结了参与式设计会议的任务和材料,并确定了主要主题。
    结果:在访谈和设计会议中,女性对基于风险的BC筛查呈阳性,特别是因为个人风险因素会被考虑在内。然而,他们强调,应明确阐述基于风险的筛查和风险类别分类的理由,特别是对于较高和较低风险类别(由于筛查频率较低,可能会导致焦虑或不公平感)。女人想知道她们的个人风险,最好在图标数组中可视化,想要关于降低风险和乳房自我检查的建议。然而,大多数危险因素被认为是女性可以改变的,乳腺密度的危险因素未知,暗示信息应强调BC风险取决于多种因素,包括乳腺密度。
    结论:信息材料,包括定量和定性信息的风险可视化,从以人为本的设计角度和心智模型方法发展而来的,由目标群体积极评价。
    BACKGROUND: Risk-based breast cancer (BC) screening raises new questions regarding information provision and risk communication. This study aimed to: 1) investigate women\'s beliefs and knowledge (i.e., mental models) regarding BC risk and (risk-based) BC screening in view of implications for information development; 2) develop novel informational materials to communicate the screening result in risk-based BC screening, including risk visualizations of both quantitative and qualitative information, from a Human-Centered Design perspective.
    METHODS: Phase 1: Interviews were conducted (n = 15, 40-50 years, 5 lower health literate) on women\'s beliefs about BC risk and (risk-based) BC screening. Phase 2: In three participatory design sessions, women (n = 4-6 across sessions, 40-50 years, 2-3 lower health literate) made assignments and created and evaluated visualizations of risk information central to the screening result. Prototypes were evaluated in two additional sessions (n = 2, 54-62 years, 0-1 lower health literate). Phase 3: Experts (n = 5) and women (n = 9, 40-74 years) evaluated the resulting materials. Two other experts were consulted throughout the development process to ensure that the content of the information materials was accurate. Interviews were transcribed literally and analysed using qualitative thematic analysis, focusing on implications for information development. Notes, assignments and materials from the participatory design sessions were summarized and main themes were identified.
    RESULTS: Women in both interviews and design sessions were positive about risk-based BC screening, especially because personal risk factors would be taken into account. However, they emphasized that the rationale of risk-based screening and classification into a risk category should be clearly stated and visualized, especially for higher- and lower-risk categories (which may cause anxiety or feelings of unfairness due to a lower screening frequency). Women wanted to know their personal risk, preferably visualized in an icon array, and wanted advice on risk reduction and breast self-examination. However, most risk factors were considered modifiable by women, and the risk factor breast density was not known, implying that information should emphasize that BC risk depends on multiple factors, including breast density.
    CONCLUSIONS: The information materials, including risk visualizations of both quantitative and qualitative information, developed from a Human-Centered Design perspective and a mental model approach, were positively evaluated by the target group.
    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
    保持和增强疫苗信心仍然是一个挑战。做出明智的决定不仅有助于避免未来可能的遗憾,而且还减少了对错误信息的敏感性。迫切需要采取干预措施,以促进有关疫苗的知情决策。本文介绍了旨在促进知情决策和间接决策的两种干预措施的系统开发。在荷兰接受孕产妇百日咳疫苗接种(MPV)。
    六步干预映射(IM)协议用于开发在线定制的决策辅助和以妊娠为中心的团体产前护理(CP)干预。使用实证文献进行需求评估,并进行调查和焦点小组(1),干预目标是在行为和决定因素水平上制定的(2),选择了行为改变的理论方法并将其转化为实际应用(3),使用以用户为中心的设计将其进一步发展为两种干预措施(4)。最后,制定了实施计划(5),和干预措施的评估(6)。
    需求评估表明,孕妇对MPV的决定通常基于在线信息和与伴侣的对话,产科护理提供者,和同龄人。针对这些发现,我们系统地开发了两个交互式的,基于理论的干预措施。我们创建了一个在线定制的决策辅助工具,让它在孕妇中进行四次迭代测试,包括那些文化水平低的人。参与者在相关性和可用性方面积极评估了干预的原型。此外,由助产士进行CP干预.
    使用IM创建了在线决策辅助和CP干预措施,以促进有关MPV的明智决策。这种对干预措施系统发展的描述不仅有助于说明设计原理,它还将有助于解释干预措施的评估,未来干预措施的发展,促进疫苗的知情决定和接受,以及与其他干预措施的比较。
    Maintaining and enhancing vaccine confidence continues to be a challenge. Making an informed decision not only helps to avoid potential future regret but also reduces susceptibility to misinformation. There is an urgent need for interventions that facilitate informed decision-making about vaccines. This paper describes the systematic development of two interventions designed to promote informed decision making and indirectly, acceptance of maternal pertussis vaccination (MPV) in the Netherlands.
    The 6-step Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol was used for the development of an online tailored decision aid and Centering Pregnancy-based Group Antenatal Care (CP) intervention. A needs assessment was done using empirical literature and conducting a survey and focus groups (1), intervention objectives were formulated at the behavior and determinants levels (2), theoretical methods of behavior change were selected and translated into practical applications (3), which were further developed into the two interventions using user-centered design (4). Finally, plans were developed for implementation (5), and evaluation (6) of the interventions.
    The needs assessment showed that pregnant women often based their decision about MPV on information sourced online and conversations with their partners, obstetric care providers, and peers. Responding to these findings, we systematically developed two interactive, theory-based interventions. We created an online tailored decision aid, subjecting it to four iterations of testing among pregnant women, including those with low literacy levels. Participants evaluated prototypes of the intervention positively on relevance and usability. In addition, a CP intervention was developed with midwives.
    Using IM resulted in the creation of an online decision aid and CP intervention to promote informed decision making regarding MPV. This description of the systematic development of the interventions not only serves to illustrate design rationales, it will also aid the interpretation of the evaluation of the interventions, the development of future interventions promoting informed decision and acceptance of vaccines, and comparisons with other interventions.
    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
    背景:嵌合抗原受体T细胞(CAR-T)疗法彻底改变了血液系统恶性肿瘤患者的治疗方法,然而,治疗可能与潜在的危及生命的毒性反应相吻合.目前,没有研究调查肿瘤学家如何与患者就CAR-T疗法进行沟通,或者患者及其护理人员在同意CAR-T疗法之前想要了解什么.
    目的:本研究描述了肿瘤学家与患者和护理人员就CAR-T治疗的风险和益处进行沟通的内容,并探讨了患者及其护理人员对CAR-T治疗的信息偏好。
    方法:我们对马萨诸塞州总医院转诊接受CAR-T治疗的20例血液系统恶性肿瘤患者和10名护理人员进行了多方法研究。我们音频记录了肿瘤科医生的初次门诊就诊,以审查并签署CAR-T治疗的同意书。随后,我们调查了患者和护理人员在同意后仍然存在的信息差距。然后,我们采访了患者和护理人员,了解他们在同意访问后对肿瘤学家沟通和信息偏好的看法。1个月,CAR-T治疗后3个月。使用框架方法进行定性数据分析。
    结果:确定了关于CAR-T疗法交流的六个主要主题:(1)肿瘤学家对CAR-T疗法的力量和创新进行了叙述,(2)肿瘤学家对CAR-T疗法设定了明确的期望,(3)肿瘤学家优先讨论积极的治疗结果,而较少地解决治疗失败或不确定性,(4)肿瘤学家将他们关于CAR-T疗法风险的讨论与关于风险缓解策略的保证相结合,(5)肿瘤学家在整个同意访问中进行移情沟通,(6)患者和照顾者在关于CAR-T治疗的沟通方面的偏好不同,但在同意访问期间在很大程度上倾向于积极的话语;(7)完成CAR-T治疗的患者及其照顾者在治疗期间和之后报告了显著的知识差距。总的来说,患者和护理人员对CAR-T疗法了解得很好,但发现了沟通差距,高级护理计划,治疗失败和治疗毒性。
    结论:患者之间主要是积极的话语,看护者,而围绕CAR-T疗法的肿瘤学家给患者和护理人员留下了关于负面结果的显著知识差距.需要进一步的研究来帮助肿瘤学家沟通治疗的不确定性,并帮助患者及其护理人员为CAR-T治疗的负面结果做好准备。
    Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with hematologic malignancies, yet treatment may coincide with the potential for life-threatening toxicities. Currently, no studies have investigated how oncologists communicate with patients about CAR-T therapy or what patients and their caregivers want to know prior to consenting for CAR-T therapy. This study characterizes the content of oncologist communication with patients and caregivers about the risks and benefits of CAR-T therapy and explore the information preferences of patients and their caregivers about CAR-T therapy. We conducted a multimethod study of 20 patients with hematologic malignancies referred for CAR-T therapy at the Massachusetts General Hospital and 10 caregivers. We audio recorded the initial outpatient visit with the oncologist to review and sign consent for CAR-T therapy. We subsequently surveyed patients and caregivers about information gaps that remained after consent. We then interviewed patients and caregiver about their perceptions of oncologist communication and information preferences after the consent visit, 1 month, and 3 months post-CAR-T therapy treatment. Qualitative data analysis was conducted using the framework approach. Six major themes regarding communication about CAR-T therapy were identified: (1) oncologists create a narrative of power and innovation about CAR-T therapy, (2) oncologists set clear expectations regarding CAR-T therapy, (3) oncologists preferentially discuss positive treatment outcomes and less frequently address treatment failures or uncertainties, (4) oncologists couple their discussion about risks of CAR-T therapy with assurances about risk mitigation strategies, (5) oncologists engage in empathetic communication throughout the consent visit, (6) patients and caregivers vary in their preferences regarding communication about CAR-T therapy but largely favor a positive discourse during the consent visit and (7) patients who completed CAR-T therapy and their caregivers report significant knowledge gaps during and after treatment. Overall, patients and caregivers felt well informed about CAR T-therapy yet identified communication gaps regarding, advanced care planning, treatment failure and treatment toxicities. A predominantly positive discourse between patients, caregivers, and oncologists around CAR-T therapy leaves patients and caregivers with significant knowledge gaps about negative outcomes. Further research is needed to help oncologists communicate about treatment uncertainties and help patients and their caregivers prepare for negative outcomes of CAR-T therapy.
    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
    目的:为了促进参与结直肠癌(CRC)筛查的知情决策,我们评估了不同时间范围内各种亚组的CRC筛查的利弊平衡.
    方法:该研究将(不)参与CRC筛查的益处和危害的发生率比例结合起来,通过腺瘤和锯齿状途径估计到CAncer微模拟模型,偏好引发调查,和利益-损害平衡模型结合所有结果,以确定CRC筛查10、20和30年的净健康益处。根据年龄估计了210个不同亚组的净健康获益概率,性别,以前参与CRC筛查,和生活方式。
    结果:CRC筛查在210个亚组中的183个亚组中在30年内是净有益的(中位概率(MP)为0.79,四分位距(IQR)为0.69-0.85)。男性(MP0.82;IQR0.69-0.89)的净健康益处大于女性(MP0.76;IQR0.67-0.83),而没有既往筛查史的人(MP0.84;IQR0.80-0.89)的净健康益处大于(MP0.69;IQR0.59-0.75)。净健康效益随着年龄的增长而下降,从55岁时的MP为0.84(IQR0.80-0.86)到75岁时的0.61(IQR0.56-0.71)。较短的时间范围导致较低的利益,20年内MP为0.70(IQR0.62-0.80),10年内MP为0.54(IQR0.48-0.67)。
    结论:我们的利弊分析提供了有关参与筛查的净健康益处的信息,根据个人的重要特征和偏好,这可以帮助筛选受邀者就筛选参与做出明智的决定。
    To facilitate informed decision making on participating in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, we assessed the benefit-harm balance of CRC screening for a wide range of subgroups over different time horizons.
    The study combined incidence proportions of benefits and harms of (not) participating in CRC screening estimated by the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to CAncer microsimulation model, a preference eliciting survey, and benefit-harm balance modeling combining all outcomes to determine the net health benefit of CRC screening over 10, 20, and 30 years. Probability of net health benefit was estimated for 210 different subgroups based on age, sex, previous participation in CRC screening, and lifestyle.
    CRC screening was net beneficial in 183 of 210 subgroups over 30 years (median probability [MP] of 0.79, interquartile range [IQR] of 0.69-0.85) across subgroups. Net health benefit was greater for men (MP 0.82; IQR 0.69-0.89) than women (MP 0.76; IQR 0.67-0.83) and for those without history of participation in previous screenings (MP 0.84; IQR 0.80-0.89) compared with those with (MP 0.69; IQR 0.59-0.75). Net health benefit decreased with increasing age, from MP of 0.84 (IQR 0.80-0.86) at age 55 to 0.61 (IQR 0.56-0.71) at age 75. Shorter time horizons led to lower benefit, with MP of 0.70 (IQR 0.62-0.80) over 20 years and 0.54 (IQR 0.48-0.67) over 10 years.
    Our benefit-harm analysis provides information about net health benefit of screening participation, based on important characteristics and preferences of individuals, which could assist screening invitees in making informed decisions on screening participation.
    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
    目的:需要有效的干预措施来促进有关疫苗接种的知情决策。
    背景:我们开发了一组产前护理(CP;以妊娠为中心)干预措施,即,关于现有团体护理环境中的MPV的会话,促进荷兰孕产妇百日咳疫苗接种的知情决策。
    目的:本研究旨在评估(1)干预措施的实施程度,(2)干预措施在多大程度上满足了孕妇和助产士促进CP的需求和愿望。
    方法:我们对6名CP促进者和10名CP参与者进行了探索性访谈,以评估干预措施的实施情况。以及如何感知干预措施及其不同组成部分。访谈采用专题分析法进行分析。此外,我们对35名参与者进行了干预前后调查,测量有关MPV的知识,以及MPV的态度和意图。
    结果:7组中有6组按照预期实施了CP干预。参与者对用于讨论MPV的交互式CP方法持积极态度。参与者和主持人评估了干预措施是积极和相关的,尽管干预很耗时,一些参与者已经对MPV做出了决定。尚未决定的人表示,本届会议有助于他们的决定。
    结论:在CP护理环境中讨论MPV是支持妊娠期MPV决策的可行策略。可以通过在怀孕16-18周之前讨论MPV来改善干预措施。需要进行更大规模的研究来评估对MPV摄取和知情决策的影响。
    OBJECTIVE: Effective interventions are needed to promote informed decision making about vaccination.
    BACKGROUND: We developed a group-antenatal care (CP; Centering Pregnancy) intervention, i.e., a session about MPV within existing group-care settings, to promote informed decision making about Maternal Pertussis Vaccination in the Netherlands.
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess (1) to what extent the intervention was implemented as intended, (2) to what extent the intervention met the needs and wishes of pregnant individuals and midwives facilitating CP.
    METHODS: We conducted exploratory interviews with 6 CP facilitators and 10 CP participants to assess the implementation of the intervention, and how the intervention and its different components were perceived. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. In addition, we conducted a pre- and post-intervention survey amongst 35 participants, measuring knowledge about MPV, and MPV attitude and intention.
    RESULTS: The CP intervention was implemented as intended in 6 out of 7 groups. Participants were positive about the interactive CP-methods used to discuss MPV. Participants and facilitators evaluated the intervention as positive and relevant, although the intervention was time-consuming, and some participants had already made the de decision about MPV. Those who had not yet decided indicated that the session was helpful for their decision.
    CONCLUSIONS: Discussing MPV in CP care settings is a feasible strategy to support decision making about MPV during pregnancy. The intervention could be improved by discussing the MPV sooner than 16-18 weeks of pregnancy. A larger-scale study is needed to assess effects on MPV uptake and informed decision making.
    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: Review
    背景:知情健康选择(IHC)关键概念是一个框架,为开发教育资源和评估人们批判性地思考健康行动的能力提供了基础。我们通过审查公众的文本和清单,开发了原始的关键概念框架,记者,和卫生专业人员,并从国际咨询小组收集结构化反馈。我们根据使用该框架的反馈和经验,从2016年到2018年每年修订原2015年框架。本文的目标是描述自2018年以来框架的发展并总结其基础。方法:对于2019年版本,我们回应了2018版本的反馈。对于当前的2022版本,除了回应对2019年版本的反馈,我们回顾了每个概念的证据基础。只要有可能,我们参考了为概念提供基础的系统审查。我们筛选了所有Cochrane方法评论并搜索了Epidemonikos,PubMed,和谷歌学者进行方法审查和元流行病学研究。结果:原始框架包括6组32个概念。2019年版本和当前的2022年版本包括我们自2016年以来使用的三个主要组中的49个概念。现在有10个子组或更高级别的概念。对于每个概念,有一个解释,包括一个或多个例子,概念的基础,和影响。引用了600多篇支持这些概念的参考文献,超过一半的参考文献是系统综述。结论:有大量证据支持IHC关键概念,自2019年以来,我们收到的变化建议很少。
    UNASSIGNED: The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts is a framework that provides a basis for developing educational resources and evaluating people\'s ability to think critically about health actions. We developed the original Key Concepts framework by reviewing texts and checklists for the public, journalists, and health professionals and collecting structured feedback from an international advisory group. We revised the original 2015 framework yearly from 2016 to 2018 based on feedback and experience using the framework. The objectives of this paper are to describe the development of the framework since 2018 and summarise their basis.
    UNASSIGNED: For the 2019 version, we responded to feedback on the 2018 version. For the current 2022 version, in addition to responding to feedback on the 2019 version, we reviewed the evidence base for each of the concepts. Whenever possible, we referenced systematic reviews that provide a basis for a concept. We screened all Cochrane methodology reviews and searched Epistemonikos, PubMed, and Google Scholar for methodology reviews and meta-epidemiological studies.
    UNASSIGNED: The original framework included 32 concepts in six groups. The 2019 version and the current 2022 version include 49 concepts in the same three main groups that we have used since 2016. There are now 10 subgroups or higher-level concepts. For each concept, there is an explanation including one or more examples, the basis for the concept, and implications. Over 600 references are cited that support the concepts, and over half of the references are systematic reviews.
    UNASSIGNED: There is a large body of evidence that supports the IHC key concepts and we have received few suggestions for changes since 2019.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Randomized Controlled Trial
    目的:调整并测试ADHD儿童看护人的知识度量,并评估决策援助(DA)的信息成分对参与者知识的影响。
    方法:根据现有知识度量和临床指南创建了一组七个知识项目。作为对被诊断患有多动症的儿童的照顾者进行的更大的横断面调查研究的一部分,护理人员被随机分配到两个手臂中的一个:1)一个DA手臂,参与者回顾了辛辛那提儿童医院DA的信息部分,和2)控制臂,参与者没有显示DA。所有参与者都完成了七个知识项目。知识项目进行了难度评估,干扰因素的质量,可接受性,和冗余。比较了DA和对照组的总知识得分(0-100)。
    结果:护理人员被分配到DA组(n=243)或对照组(n=260)。所有七个知识项目都被保留,因为没有项目太难或太容易,使用了所有响应选项,几乎没有丢失的数据,没有多余的东西.总体知识得分呈正态分布,几乎涵盖了全部分数(5-100)。接受DA成分的人的知识得分(M=68,SD=23)高于未接受DA成分的人(M=60,SD=19,p<.001,d=0.4)。
    结论:看护者ADHD知识(CAKe)测量是可以接受的,并且证明了结构有效性,因为那些被分配审查DA组件的人比那些没有被分配审查DA组件的人表现出更多的知识。
    Adapt and test a measure of knowledge for caregivers of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and evaluate the impact of the information component of a decision aid (DA) on participant knowledge.
    A set of seven knowledge items were created based on prior knowledge measures and clinical guidelines. As part of a larger cross-sectional survey study of caregivers of children diagnosed with ADHD, caregivers were randomized to one of two arms: 1) a DA arm, where participants reviewed the information component of the Cincinnati Children\'s Hospital\'s DA, and 2) a control arm, where participants were not shown a DA. All participants completed the seven knowledge items. Knowledge items were assessed for difficulty, quality of distractors, acceptability, and redundancy. Total knowledge scores (0-100) for the DA and control arm were compared.
    Caregivers were assigned to the DA arm (n = 243) or the control arm (n = 260). All 7 knowledge items were retained as no items were too difficult or too easy, all response options were used, there were little missing data, and no items were redundant. The overall knowledge score was normally distributed, and almost covered the full range of scores (5-100). Those who received the DA component had higher knowledge scores (M=68, SD=23) than those who did not receive the DA component (M=60, SD=19, P < .01, d=0.4).
    The Caregiver ADHD Knowledge (CAKe) measure was acceptable and demonstrated construct validity as those who were assigned to review the DA component demonstrated greater knowledge than those who were not assigned to review the DA component.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号