• 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
Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): reliability and validity.罗切斯特参与性决策量表(RPAD):信度与效度
Ann Fam Med. 2005 Sep-Oct;3(5):436-42. doi: 10.1370/afm.305.
2
Emotion language in primary care encounters: reliability and validity of an emotion word count coding system.基层医疗问诊中的情感语言:一种情感词汇计数编码系统的信度与效度
Patient Educ Couns. 2005 May;57(2):232-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.06.005.
3
Influence of accompanied encounters on patient-centeredness with older patients.陪伴式问诊对老年患者以患者为中心的影响。
J Am Board Fam Pract. 2005 Sep-Oct;18(5):344-54. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.18.5.344.
4
The Chinese Version of Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): Reliability and Validity.罗切斯特参与式决策量表中文版(RPAD):信效度研究
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Dec 12;2020:4343815. doi: 10.1155/2020/4343815. eCollection 2020.
5
The Physician Recommendation Coding System (PhyReCS): A Reliable and Valid Method to Quantify the Strength of Physician Recommendations During Clinical Encounters.医师推荐编码系统(PhyReCS):一种在临床会诊期间量化医师推荐强度的可靠且有效的方法。
Med Decis Making. 2017 Jan;37(1):46-55. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16654692. Epub 2016 Jun 24.
6
The effects of a shared decision-making intervention in primary care of depression: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.共同决策干预对抑郁症初级护理的影响:一项整群随机对照试验。
Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Aug;67(3):324-32. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.03.023. Epub 2007 May 16.
7
Ratings of physician communication by real and standardized patients.真实患者和标准化患者对医生沟通的评分。
Ann Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;5(2):151-8. doi: 10.1370/afm.643.
8
The relative importance of physician communication, participatory decision making, and patient understanding in diabetes self-management.医生沟通、参与式决策以及患者理解在糖尿病自我管理中的相对重要性。
J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Apr;17(4):243-52. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10905.x.
9
The psychometric properties of Observer OPTION(5), an observer measure of shared decision making.观察者 OPTION(5) 的心理测量特性,这是一种关于共同决策的观察者测量方法。
Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Aug;98(8):970-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.04.010. Epub 2015 Apr 29.
10
Assessing patient-centered communication in a family practice setting: how do we measure it, and whose opinion matters?评估家庭医疗环境中的以患者为中心的沟通:我们如何衡量它,以及谁的意见重要?
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Sep;84(3):294-302. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.05.027. Epub 2011 Jul 5.

引用本文的文献

1
A clinician implementation protocol for BetterBrains: An online, person-centred risk factor management program to prevent cognitive decline.“更聪慧大脑”的临床医生实施协议:一项在线的、以患者为中心的预防认知衰退风险因素管理项目。
Australas J Ageing. 2025 Mar;44(1):e70005. doi: 10.1111/ajag.70005.
2
Investigating shared decision-making during the use of a digital health tool for physical activity planning in cardiac rehabilitation.在心脏康复中使用数字健康工具进行体育活动规划时,调查共同决策情况。
Front Digit Health. 2024 Jan 4;5:1324488. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1324488. eCollection 2023.
3
Behavioural observation tool for patient involvement and collaboration in emergency care teams (PIC-ET-tool).患者参与和协作在急诊医疗团队中的行为观察工具(PIC-ET 工具)。
BMC Emerg Med. 2023 Jul 1;23(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12873-023-00841-7.
4
Factors Influencing Participation in Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Glaucoma in China: A Cross-Sectional Study.影响中国青光眼患者参与共同决策的因素:一项横断面研究。
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023 May 16;17:1261-1270. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S411274. eCollection 2023.
5
Measurement of person-centred consultation skills among healthcare practitioners: a systematic review of reviews of validation studies.测量医疗从业者以患者为中心的咨询技能:验证研究的系统评价综述。
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Apr 5;23(1):211. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04184-6.
6
Links between evidence-based medicine and shared decision-making in courses for doctors in training: a scoping review.基于证据的医学与培训医生课程中的共同决策之间的联系:范围综述。
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 25;12(4):e057335. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057335.
7
Shared decision making process measures and patient problems.共享决策过程的测量和患者问题。
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Jul;105(7):2457-2465. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.001. Epub 2021 Nov 8.
8
The Chinese Version of Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): Reliability and Validity.罗切斯特参与式决策量表中文版(RPAD):信效度研究
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Dec 12;2020:4343815. doi: 10.1155/2020/4343815. eCollection 2020.
9
A mixed methods process evaluation of a person-centred falls prevention program.一项以个人为中心的跌倒预防计划的混合方法过程评估。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Nov 28;19(1):906. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4614-z.
10
Do Shared Decision-Making Measures Reflect Key Elements of Shared Decision Making? A Content Review of Coding Schemes.共享决策措施是否反映了共享决策的关键要素?编码方案的内容回顾。
Med Decis Making. 2019 Oct;39(7):886-893. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19874347. Epub 2019 Sep 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Promoting glycemic control through diabetes self-management: evaluating a patient activation intervention.通过糖尿病自我管理促进血糖控制:评估一项患者激活干预措施。
Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Jan;56(1):28-34. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2003.11.008.
2
Effect on health-related outcomes of interventions to alter the interaction between patients and practitioners: a systematic review of trials.改变患者与从业者互动的干预措施对健康相关结局的影响:一项试验的系统评价
Ann Fam Med. 2004 Nov-Dec;2(6):595-608. doi: 10.1370/afm.142.
3
A contribution to the philosophy of medicine; the basic models of the doctor-patient relationship.对医学哲学的一项贡献;医患关系的基本模式。
AMA Arch Intern Med. 1956 May;97(5):585-92. doi: 10.1001/archinte.1956.00250230079008.
4
The other half of the whole: teaching patients to communicate with physicians.整体的另一半:教导患者与医生沟通。
Fam Med. 2002 May;34(5):344-52.
5
The Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS): utility and flexibility for analysis of medical interactions.罗特互动分析系统(RIAS):用于医学互动分析的实用性与灵活性
Patient Educ Couns. 2002 Apr;46(4):243-51. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00012-5.
6
Switching doctors: predictors of voluntary disenrollment from a primary physician's practice.更换医生:从初级医生诊所自愿退出的预测因素。
J Fam Pract. 2001 Feb;50(2):130-6.
7
Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics.门诊实践中的明智决策:回归基础的时候了。
JAMA. 1999;282(24):2313-20. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.24.2313.
8
Supporting autonomy to motivate patients with diabetes for glucose control.支持自主性以激励糖尿病患者进行血糖控制。
Diabetes Care. 1998 Oct;21(10):1644-51. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.10.1644.
9
Linking primary care performance to outcomes of care.将初级保健绩效与护理结果相联系。
J Fam Pract. 1998 Sep;47(3):213-20.
10
Patient participation in decision-making.患者参与决策。
Soc Sci Med. 1998 Aug;47(3):329-39. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00059-8.

罗切斯特参与性决策量表(RPAD):信度与效度

Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): reliability and validity.

作者信息

Shields Cleveland G, Franks Peter, Fiscella Kevin, Meldrum Sean, Epstein Ronald M

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester Center to Improve Communication in Health Care, Rochester, NY, USA.

出版信息

Ann Fam Med. 2005 Sep-Oct;3(5):436-42. doi: 10.1370/afm.305.

DOI:10.1370/afm.305
PMID:16189060
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1466919/
Abstract

PURPOSE

We wanted develop a reliable and valid objective measure of patient-physician collaborative decision making, the Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD).

METHODS

Based on an informed decision-making model, the RPAD assesses physician behavior that encourages patient participation in decision making. Data were from a study of physician-patient communication of 100 primary care physicians. Physician encounters with 2 standardized patients each were audio recorded, resulting in 193 useable recordings. Transcribed recordings were coded both with RPAD and the Measure of Patient-Centered Communication (MPCC), which includes a related construct, Finding Common Ground. Two sets of dependent variables were derived from (1) surveys of the standardized patients and (2) surveys of 50 patients of each physician, who assessed their perceptions of the physician-patient relationship.

RESULTS

The RPAD was coded reliably (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.72). RPAD correlated with Finding Common Ground (r = 0.19, P < .01) and with the survey measures of standardized patient's perceptions of the physician-patient relationship (r = 0.32 - 0.36 [P < .005]) but less with the patient survey measures (r = 0.06 to 0.07 [P < .005]). Multivariate, hierarchical analyses suggested that the RPAD made a more robust contribution to explaining variance in standardized patient perceptions than did the MPCC Finding Common Ground.

CONCLUSIONS

The RPAD shows promise as a reliable, valid, and easy-to-code objective measure of participatory decision making.

摘要

目的

我们希望开发一种可靠且有效的患者与医生共同决策的客观测量方法,即罗切斯特参与式决策量表(RPAD)。

方法

基于知情决策模型,RPAD评估鼓励患者参与决策的医生行为。数据来自一项对100名初级保健医生的医患沟通研究。每位医生与2名标准化患者的诊疗过程进行了音频录制,共得到193份可用录音。转录后的录音使用RPAD和以患者为中心的沟通测量量表(MPCC)进行编码,MPCC包含一个相关结构,即找到共同点。两组因变量分别来自:(1)标准化患者的调查;(2)每位医生的50名患者的调查,这些患者评估了他们对医患关系的看法。

结果

RPAD的编码具有可靠性(组内相关系数[ICC]=0.72)。RPAD与找到共同点相关(r=0.19,P<.01),与标准化患者对医患关系看法的调查测量结果相关(r=0.32 - 0.36[P<.005]),但与患者调查测量结果的相关性较低(r=0.06至0.07[P<.005])。多变量分层分析表明,与MPCC的找到共同点相比,RPAD在解释标准化患者看法的方差方面做出了更有力的贡献。

结论

RPAD有望成为一种可靠、有效且易于编码的参与式决策客观测量方法。