• 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
Validation and cultural adaptation of a German version of the Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty scales.德语版《医生对不确定性的反应量表》的验证与文化适应性研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 11;7:81. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-81.
2
Evaluation and cultural adaptation of a German version of the AIMS2-SF questionnaire (German AIMS2-SF).《简明精神状态检查表2-简短版》德语版问卷(德语AIMS2-SF)的评估与文化适应性研究
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Sep;44(9):1190-5. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh718. Epub 2005 Jun 21.
3
The Italian version of the Sickness Impact Profile-Roland Scale for chronic pain: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, validity and sensitivity to change.意大利版 Sickness Impact Profile-Roland 量表用于慢性疼痛:跨文化适应性、信度、效度和变化敏感性。
Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(15-16):1299-305. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2010.527030. Epub 2010 Oct 29.
4
Development of the Italian Version of the Neck Disability Index: cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change.《颈痛疾患指数量表(意大利语版)的研制:跨文化调适、因子分析、信度、效度及对变化的敏感性》
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Aug 1;37(17):E1038-44. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182579795.
5
Evaluation of a culturally adapted German version of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC 5A) questionnaire in a sample of osteoarthritis patients.在骨关节炎患者样本中对经文化调适的德语版慢性病患者护理评估问卷(PACIC 5A)进行评估。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2007 Oct;13(5):806-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00786.x.
6
Development of the Italian version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI-I): A cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity study.意大利版奥斯威斯利功能障碍指数(ODI-I)的开发:一项跨文化适应、信效度研究
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Sep 1;34(19):2090-5. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181aa1e6b.
7
Cultural adaptation and validation of a German version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS2).《关节炎影响测量量表(AIMS2)德文版的文化调适与验证》
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007 Oct;15(10):1128-33. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.03.021. Epub 2007 May 23.
8
The Italian version of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ-I): cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change.《恐惧-回避信念问卷(FABQ-I)》意大利语版:跨文化适应、因子分析、信度、效度及对变化的敏感性。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Mar 15;37(6):E374-80. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ff5a7.
9
Validation of the Turkish version of the Quebec back pain disability scale for patients with low back pain.针对腰痛患者的魁北克腰痛残疾量表土耳其语版本的验证
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Mar 15;34(6):E219-24. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181971e2d.
10
Validity and reliability of an adapted german version of scoliosis research society-22 questionnaire.脊柱侧弯研究协会22项问卷德文改编版的效度和信度
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Apr 15;34(8):818-21. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819b33be.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric re-evaluation of the German version of the Physicians' Reaction to Uncertainty Scale.《德国版医生对不确定性反应量表》的心理测量学重新评估
Front Psychol. 2025 Aug 6;16:1552177. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1552177. eCollection 2025.
2
Exploring burnout and uncertainty in healthcare professionals: a path analysis within the context of rare diseases.探索医疗保健专业人员的职业倦怠和不确定性:罕见病背景下的路径分析
Front Public Health. 2025 Feb 27;13:1417771. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1417771. eCollection 2025.
3
Communication of Diagnostic Uncertainty in Primary Care and Its Impact on Patient Experience: an Integrative Systematic Review.基层医疗中诊断不确定性的沟通及其对患者体验的影响:综合系统评价。
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Feb;38(3):738-754. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07768-y. Epub 2022 Sep 20.
4
Developing and validating of the Clinical Uncertainty Measurement Questionnaire (CUMQ) among practicing physicians and clinical residents in Iran.伊朗执业医师和临床住院医师临床不确定度测量问卷(CUMQ)的编制和验证。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Jun 16;22(1):462. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03444-1.
5
Referral determinants in Swiss primary care with a special focus on managed care.瑞士初级医疗中的转诊决定因素,特别关注管理式医疗。
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 7;12(11):e0186307. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186307. eCollection 2017.
6
Communicating and dealing with uncertainty in general practice: the association with neuroticism.全科医疗中不确定性的沟通与应对:与神经质的关联。
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 16;9(7):e102780. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102780. eCollection 2014.

本文引用的文献

1
Effect of enhanced feedback and brief educational reminder messages on laboratory test requesting in primary care: a cluster randomised trial.强化反馈与简短教育提醒信息对基层医疗中实验室检查申请的影响:一项整群随机试验
Lancet. 2006 Jun 17;367(9527):1990-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68888-0.
2
[Stepwise diagnostic workup in general practice as a consequence of the Bayesian reasoning].[基于贝叶斯推理的全科医疗逐步诊断检查]
Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2006;100(2):121-7.
3
Physician responses to ambiguous patient symptoms.医生对模糊患者症状的反应。
J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jun;20(6):525-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0093.x.
4
Translating evidence-based information into effective risk communication: current challenges and opportunities.将基于证据的信息转化为有效的风险沟通:当前的挑战与机遇。
J Lab Clin Med. 2005 Apr;145(4):171-80. doi: 10.1016/j.lab.2005.02.006.
5
Improving test ordering in primary care: the added value of a small-group quality improvement strategy compared with classic feedback only.改善基层医疗中的检查医嘱开具:与仅采用传统反馈相比,小组质量改进策略的附加价值。
Ann Fam Med. 2004 Nov-Dec;2(6):569-75. doi: 10.1370/afm.244.
6
On the challenges of using evidence-based information: the role of clinical uncertainty.论循证信息应用中的挑战:临床不确定性的作用
J Lab Clin Med. 2004 Aug;144(2):60-4. doi: 10.1016/j.lab.2004.05.013.
7
Communicating evidence for participatory decision making.为参与式决策提供证据
JAMA. 2004 May 19;291(19):2359-66. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.19.2359.
8
From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care.从最佳证据到最佳实践:有效实施患者护理变革。
Lancet. 2003 Oct 11;362(9391):1225-30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1.
9
Unexplained complaints in general practice: prevalence, patients' expectations, and professionals' test-ordering behavior.全科医疗中的不明原因主诉:患病率、患者期望及专业人员的检查开具行为
Med Decis Making. 2003 May-Jun;23(3):226-31. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03023003004.
10
[Shared decision making: an overview of international research literature].[共同决策:国际研究文献综述]
Soz Praventivmed. 2003;48(1):11-23. doi: 10.1007/s000380300002.

德语版《医生对不确定性的反应量表》的验证与文化适应性研究

Validation and cultural adaptation of a German version of the Physicians' Reactions to Uncertainty scales.

作者信息

Schneider Antonius, Szecsenyi Joachim, Barie Stefan, Joest Katharina, Rosemann Thomas

机构信息

Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Medical Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 11;7:81. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-81.

DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-7-81
PMID:17562018
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1903353/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to examine the validity of a translated and culturally adapted version of the Physicians' Reaction to Uncertainty scales (PRU) in primary care physicians.

METHODS

In a structured process, the original questionnaire was translated, culturally adapted and assessed after administering it to 93 GPs. Test-retest reliability was tested by sending the questionnaire to the GPs again after two weeks.

RESULTS

The principal factor analysis confirmed the postulated four-factor structure underlying the 15 items. In contrast to the original version, item 5 achieved a higher loading on the 'concern about bad outcomes' scale. Consequently, we rearranged the scales. Good item-scale correlations were obtained, with Pearson's correlation coefficient ranging from 0.56-0.84. As regards the item-discriminant validity between the scales 'anxiety due to uncertainty' and 'concern about bad outcomes', partially high correlations (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.02-0.69; p < 0.001) were found, indicating an overlap between both constructs. The assessment of internal consistency revealed satisfactory values; Cronbach's alpha of the rearranged version was 0.86 or higher for all scales. Test-retest-reliability, assessed by means of the intraclass-correlation-coefficient (ICC), exceeded 0.84, except for the 'reluctance to disclose mistakes to physicians' scale (ICC = 0.66). In this scale, some substantial floor effects occurred, with 29.3% of answers showing the lowest possible value.

CONCLUSION

Dealing with uncertainty is an important issue in daily practice. The psychometric properties of the rearranged German version of the PRU are satisfying. The revealed floor effects do not limit the significance of the questionnaire. Thus, the German version of the PRU could contribute to the further evaluation of the impact of uncertainty in primary care physicians.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在检验经翻译和文化调适后的医师对不确定性反应量表(PRU)在基层医疗医生中的有效性。

方法

通过结构化流程,对原始问卷进行翻译、文化调适,并在93名全科医生中进行施测后评估。通过在两周后再次向全科医生发送问卷来测试重测信度。

结果

主成分分析证实了15个项目背后假定的四因素结构。与原始版本不同,项目5在“对不良结果的担忧”量表上的载荷更高。因此,我们重新调整了量表。各项目与量表之间具有良好的相关性,Pearson相关系数在0.56 - 0.84之间。关于“不确定性焦虑”和“对不良结果的担忧”量表之间的项目区分效度,发现部分相关性较高(Pearson相关系数为0.02 - 0.69;p < 0.001),表明这两个结构之间存在重叠。内部一致性评估显示出令人满意的值;重新调整版本的所有量表的Cronbach's alpha均为0.86或更高。除“不愿向医生披露错误”量表(组内相关系数ICC = 0.66)外,通过组内相关系数(ICC)评估的重测信度超过0.84。在该量表中,出现了一些显著的地板效应,29.3%的答案显示为可能的最低值。

结论

应对不确定性是日常实践中的一个重要问题。重新调整后的德语版PRU的心理测量学特性令人满意。所揭示的地板效应并不限制问卷的重要性。因此,德语版PRU有助于进一步评估不确定性对基层医疗医生的影响。