• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Understanding risk and lessons for clinical risk communication about treatment preferences.理解风险以及关于治疗偏好的临床风险沟通的经验教训。
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i9-13. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100009...
2
Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk.衡量患者对治疗的偏好和对风险的认知。
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i2-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100002...
3
Suffering in deference: a focus group study of older cardiac patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk.顺从中的痛苦:一项关于老年心脏病患者治疗偏好和风险认知的焦点小组研究
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i23-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100023...
4
The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments.患者对治疗风险的理解程度。
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i14-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100014...
5
Informed Decision Making: Assessment of the Quality of Physician Communication about Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.知情决策:对医生关于前列腺癌诊断与治疗沟通质量的评估
Med Decis Making. 2015 Nov;35(8):999-1009. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15597226. Epub 2015 Aug 24.
6
Informed consent: moral necessity or illusion?知情同意:道德必需还是幻想?
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i29-33. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100029...
7
Bioethics committees and examining consent within the patient-physician relationship in Turkey.土耳其的生物伦理委员会与医患关系中的知情同意审查
Med Law. 2010 Sep;29(3):403-18.
8
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.医院环境中患者与护士以患者为中心的沟通体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072.
9
A systematic review of risk communication in clinical trials: How does it influence decisions to participate and what are the best methods to improve understanding in a trial context?临床试验中的风险沟通系统评价:它如何影响参与决策,以及在试验背景下改善理解的最佳方法是什么?
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 16;15(11):e0242239. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242239. eCollection 2020.
10
Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice.迈向“临界点”:决策辅助工具与患者的明智选择。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 May-Jun;26(3):716-25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.716.

引用本文的文献

1
Risk of cardiovascular disease in Germany: results from GEDA 2022.德国心血管疾病风险:2022年德国健康访谈与体检调查(GEDA)结果
J Health Monit. 2025 May 21;10(2):e13126. doi: 10.25646/13126. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
Comorbidity-stratified estimates of 30-day mortality risk by age for unvaccinated men and women with COVID-19: a population-based cohort study.基于人群的队列研究:未接种 COVID-19 疫苗的男性和女性 30 天死亡率的合并症分层估计值与年龄的关系。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Mar 13;23(1):482. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15386-4.
3
Thyroid Cancer Risk Communication in Patients with Thyroid Nodules.甲状腺结节患者的甲状腺癌风险沟通。
J Cancer Educ. 2023 Aug;38(4):1234-1240. doi: 10.1007/s13187-022-02253-w. Epub 2023 Jan 5.
4
Navigating ethical challenges of conducting randomized clinical trials on COVID-19.应对新冠病毒随机临床试验中的伦理挑战。
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2022 Jan 28;17(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s13010-022-00115-3.
5
The challenge of equipoise in trials with a surgical and non-surgical comparison: a qualitative synthesis using meta-ethnography.具有手术和非手术比较的试验中的均衡挑战:使用荟萃元分析的定性综合。
Trials. 2021 Oct 7;22(1):678. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05403-5.
6
Diagnostic uncertainty in primary care: what is known about its communication, and what are the associated ethical issues?基层医疗中的诊断不确定性:其沟通方式有哪些?相关伦理问题是什么?
Fam Pract. 2021 Sep 25;38(5):654-668. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmab023.
7
Risky business, healthy lives: how risk perception, risk preferences and information influence consumer's risky health choices.冒险的生意,健康的生活:风险感知、风险偏好和信息如何影响消费者的高风险健康选择。
Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Jul;22(5):811-831. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01291-3. Epub 2021 Apr 10.
8
Translating Evidence to Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.将证据转化应用于晚期帕金森病患者:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Mov Disord. 2021 Jun;36(6):1293-1307. doi: 10.1002/mds.28599. Epub 2021 Apr 2.
9
The Impact of Matching to Psychotherapy Preference on Engagement in a Randomized Controlled Trial for Patients With Advanced Cancer.在一项针对晚期癌症患者的随机对照试验中,匹配心理治疗偏好对参与度的影响。
Front Psychol. 2021 Feb 24;12:637519. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637519. eCollection 2021.
10
A systematic review of risk communication in clinical trials: How does it influence decisions to participate and what are the best methods to improve understanding in a trial context?临床试验中的风险沟通系统评价:它如何影响参与决策,以及在试验背景下改善理解的最佳方法是什么?
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 16;15(11):e0242239. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242239. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

1
Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools.患者参与医疗决策偏好的变异性:对决策支持工具使用的启示
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i34-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100034...
2
Informed consent: moral necessity or illusion?知情同意:道德必需还是幻想?
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i29-33. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100029...
3
Importance of risk communication and decision making in cardiovascular conditions in older patients: a discussion paper.老年患者心血管疾病中风险沟通与决策的重要性:一篇讨论文章。
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i19-22. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100019...
4
The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments.患者对治疗风险的理解程度。
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i14-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100014...
5
Presenting risk information--a review of the effects of "framing" and other manipulations on patient outcomes.呈现风险信息——“框架”及其他操控手段对患者结果影响的综述
J Health Commun. 2001 Jan-Mar;6(1):61-82. doi: 10.1080/10810730150501413.
6
Implementing shared decision-making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities.在日常实践中实施共同决策:障碍与机遇
Health Expect. 2000 Sep;3(3):182-191. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2000.00093.x.
7
A randomized controlled trial of information-giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care.一项针对接受冠状动脉造影检查患者的信息提供随机对照试验:对护理结局的影响。
Health Expect. 1998 Jun;1(1):50-61. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00007.x.
8
Development of a patient decision aid for choice of surgical treatment for breast cancer.一种用于乳腺癌手术治疗选择的患者决策辅助工具的开发。
Health Expect. 1998 Jun;1(1):23-36. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00003.x.
9
The effectiveness of one-to-one risk communication interventions in health care: a systematic review.一对一风险沟通干预措施在医疗保健中的有效性:一项系统综述。
Med Decis Making. 2000 Jul-Sep;20(3):290-7. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0002000305.
10
Preconsultation education promoting breast cancer screening: does the choice of media make a difference?促进乳腺癌筛查的咨询前教育:媒体选择是否有影响?
J Cancer Educ. 1998 Fall;13(3):152-61. doi: 10.1080/08858199809528537.

理解风险以及关于治疗偏好的临床风险沟通的经验教训。

Understanding risk and lessons for clinical risk communication about treatment preferences.

作者信息

Edwards A, Elwyn G

机构信息

Department of General Practice, University of Wales College of Medicine, Llanedeyrn Health Centre, Llanedeyrn, Cardiff CF3 7PN, UK.

出版信息

Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i9-13. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100009...

DOI:10.1136/qhc.0100009..
PMID:11533431
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1765742/
Abstract

This paper defines risk and its component elements and describes where clinical practice may be starting from in terms of what is reported in the literature about understanding risks and the information requirements of consumers. It notes briefly how theoretical models in the literature contribute to our understanding by providing a basis from which to summarise current evidence about the effects of healthcare interventions which address risks and risk behaviour. The situations or types of interventions in which risk related interventions are most effective are described, but a significant caveat is noted about the types of outcomes which have been reported in the literature and which are most appropriate to evaluate. The effects of "framing" variations in the information given to consumers and the ethical dilemmas these raise for a debate about "informed choice" in healthcare programmes are discussed. In response to both the practical and ethical dilemmas that arise from the current evidence, some of the areas where attention should be focused in the future are outlined so that both health gain and informed choice might be achieved. These include the use of decision aids, although their implementation is not widespread at present. Lessons from the current literature on how further progress can be made towards improved communication, discussion between professionals and consumers, and enhancing informed choice are discussed.

摘要

本文定义了风险及其组成要素,并根据文献中关于理解风险和消费者信息需求的报道,描述了临床实践可能的起点。文章简要指出文献中的理论模型如何通过提供一个基础来帮助我们理解,以便总结当前关于应对风险和风险行为的医疗保健干预措施效果的证据。文中描述了与风险相关的干预措施最有效的情况或干预类型,但也指出了文献中报道的、最适合评估的结果类型存在的一个重要警告。讨论了向消费者提供信息时 “框架” 变化的影响以及这些变化给医疗保健项目中 “知情选择” 辩论带来的伦理困境。针对当前证据引发的实际和伦理困境,概述了未来应关注的一些领域,以便既能实现健康收益又能实现知情选择。这些领域包括使用决策辅助工具,尽管目前其应用并不广泛。文中还讨论了从当前文献中汲取的关于如何在改善沟通、专业人员与消费者之间的讨论以及增强知情选择方面取得进一步进展的经验教训。