Suppr超能文献

医疗问诊中的共同决策:我们讨论的是同一件事吗?

Shared decision making in the medical encounter: are we all talking about the same thing?

作者信息

Moumjid Nora, Gafni Amiram, Brémond Alain, Carrère Marie-Odile

机构信息

GRESAC (GATE, UMR 5824)-CNRS, University Lumière Lyon 2, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France.

出版信息

Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):539-46. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07306779. Epub 2007 Sep 14.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This article aims to explore 1) whether after all the research done on shared decision making (SDM) in the medical encounter, a clear definition (or definitions) of SDM exists; 2) whether authors provide a definition of SDM when they use the term; 3) and whether authors are consistent, throughout a given paper, with respect to the research described and the definition they propose or cite.

METHODS

The authors searched different databases (Medline, HealthStar, Cinahl, Cancerlit, Sociological Abstracts, and Econlit) from 1997 to December 2004. The keywords used were informed decision making and shared decision making as these are the keywords more often encountered in the literature. The languages selected were English and French.

RESULTS

The 76 reported papers show that 1) several authors clearly define what they mean by SDM or by another closely related phrase, such as informed shared decision making. 2) About a third of the papers reviewed (25/76) cite these authors although 8 of them do not use the term in a manner consistent with the definition cited. 3) Certain authors use the term SDM inconsistently with the definition they propose, and some use the terms informed decision making and SDM as if they were synonymous. 4) Twenty-one papers do not provide or cite any definition, or their use of the term (i.e., SDM) is not consistent with the definition they provide.

CONCLUSION

Although several clear definitions of shared decision making have been proposed, they are cited by only about a third of the papers reviewed. In the other papers, authors refer to the term without specifying or citing a definition or use the term inconsistently with their definition. This is a problem because having a clear definition of the concept and following this definition are essential to guide and focus research. Authors should use the term consistently with the identified definition.

摘要

目的

本文旨在探讨:1)在对医疗过程中共同决策(SDM)进行了所有研究之后,是否存在对SDM的明确定义;2)作者在使用该术语时是否给出了SDM的定义;3)作者在给定的论文中,对于所描述的研究及其提出或引用的定义是否保持一致。

方法

作者检索了1997年至2004年12月期间的不同数据库(医学索引数据库、健康之星数据库、护理学与健康领域数据库、癌症文献数据库、社会学文摘数据库和经济学文献数据库)。使用的关键词是知情决策和共同决策,因为这些是文献中更常出现的关键词。选择的语言是英语和法语。

结果

76篇报道的论文表明:1)几位作者明确界定了他们所说的SDM或其他密切相关短语(如知情共同决策)的含义。2)约三分之一的综述论文(25/76)引用了这些作者的观点,尽管其中8篇论文使用该术语的方式与所引用的定义不一致。3)某些作者使用SDM术语的方式与他们提出的定义不一致,一些作者将知情决策和SDM术语视为同义词。4)21篇论文未提供或引用任何定义,或者他们对该术语(即SDM)的使用与他们提供的定义不一致。

结论

虽然已经提出了几个关于共同决策的明确定义,但在所综述的论文中只有约三分之一引用了这些定义。在其他论文中,作者提及该术语时未明确说明或引用定义,或者使用该术语的方式与他们的定义不一致。这是一个问题,因为对概念有明确定义并遵循该定义对于指导和聚焦研究至关重要。作者应按照已确定的定义一致地使用该术语。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验