• 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
Clinicians' concerns about decision support interventions for patients facing breast cancer surgery options: understanding the challenge of implementing shared decision-making.临床医生对面临乳腺癌手术选择的患者的决策支持干预措施的担忧:理解实施共享决策的挑战。
Health Expect. 2011 Jun;14(2):133-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00633.x. Epub 2010 Oct 28.
2
Clinicians' perceptions of digital vs. paper-based decision support interventions.临床医生对数字与纸质决策支持干预措施的看法。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Apr;21(2):175-9. doi: 10.1111/jep.12269. Epub 2014 Oct 16.
3
Increasing readiness to decide and strengthening behavioral intentions: evaluating the impact of a web-based patient decision aid for breast cancer treatment options (BresDex: www.bresdex.com).提高决策准备度和增强行为意向:评估基于网络的乳腺癌治疗方案选择患者决策辅助工具(BresDex:www.bresdex.com)的影响。
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Aug;88(2):209-17. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.03.012. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
4
Patients' decision-making in a UK specialist centre with high mastectomy rates.英国一家乳房切除术率高的专科中心的患者决策。
Breast. 2008 Dec;17(6):574-9. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2008.08.001. Epub 2008 Sep 14.
5
Efficient development and usability testing of decision support interventions for older women with breast cancer.针对老年乳腺癌女性的决策支持干预措施的高效开发与可用性测试。
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019 Jan 14;13:131-143. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S178347. eCollection 2019.
6
Theory-based design and field-testing of an intervention to support women choosing surgery for breast cancer: BresDex.基于理论的设计和干预措施的现场测试,以支持女性选择乳腺癌手术:BresDex。
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Feb;86(2):179-88. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.04.014. Epub 2011 May 14.
7
What are patients' goals and concerns about breast reconstruction after mastectomy?乳房切除术后患者对于乳房重建的目标和担忧是什么?
Ann Plast Surg. 2010 May;64(5):567-9. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181bffc9b.
8
In the moment: women speak about surgical treatment decision making days after a breast cancer diagnosis.当下:乳腺癌确诊数日后女性讲述手术治疗决策过程
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2009 Sep;36(5):E257-65. doi: 10.1188/09.ONF.E257-E265.
9
Process evaluation of the Bridging the Age Gap in Breast Cancer decision support intervention cluster randomised trial.乳腺癌决策支持干预群随机试验中缩小年龄差距的过程评估。
Trials. 2021 Jul 13;22(1):447. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05360-z.
10
Understanding decision-making for and against oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery as an alternative to a mastectomy in early breast cancer: UK ANTHEM qualitative study.理解早期乳腺癌保乳手术替代乳房切除术的决策因素:英国 ANTHEM 定性研究。
Br J Surg. 2024 Jun 12;111(6). doi: 10.1093/bjs/znae133.

引用本文的文献

1
Externally validated and clinically useful machine learning algorithms to support patient-related decision-making in oncology: a scoping review.用于支持肿瘤学中患者相关决策的经过外部验证且具有临床实用性的机器学习算法:一项范围综述。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Feb 21;25(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02463-y.
2
Identifying research priorities for improving information and support for patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a UK patient-centred priority setting project.确定改善接受乳腺癌手术患者信息和支持的研究重点:一项以英国患者为中心的重点制定项目。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2024 Nov;208(1):215-222. doi: 10.1007/s10549-024-07413-8. Epub 2024 Jun 24.
3
Understanding decision-making for and against oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery as an alternative to a mastectomy in early breast cancer: UK ANTHEM qualitative study.理解早期乳腺癌保乳手术替代乳房切除术的决策因素:英国 ANTHEM 定性研究。
Br J Surg. 2024 Jun 12;111(6). doi: 10.1093/bjs/znae133.
4
What are the perspectives of patients with hand and wrist conditions, chronic pain, and patients recovering from stroke on the use of patient and outcome information in everyday care? A Mixed-Methods study.手部和腕部疾病、慢性疼痛以及中风后康复患者对日常护理中使用患者和结果信息的看法如何?一项混合方法研究。
Qual Life Res. 2024 Sep;33(9):2573-2587. doi: 10.1007/s11136-024-03685-1. Epub 2024 Jun 5.
5
Shared Decision-making in Breast Cancer Reconstructive Surgery: Experience in a Leading Hospital.乳腺癌重建手术中的共同决策:一家领先医院的经验
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024 May 23;12(5):e5846. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005846. eCollection 2024 May.
6
Explaining risks and benefits of loco-regional treatments to patients.向患者解释局部治疗的风险和获益。
Breast. 2023 Oct;71:132-137. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.08.006. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
7
Ready to Make A Decision: A Model of Informational Aids to Improve Informed Participation in Clinical Trial Research.准备做出决策:一种改善临床试验研究中知情参与的信息辅助工具模型。
J Health Commun. 2019;24(12):865-877. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2019.1680773. Epub 2019 Oct 30.
8
A study protocol of the effectiveness of PEGASUS: a multi-centred study comparing an intervention to promote shared decision making about breast reconstruction with treatment as usual.PEGASUS有效性的研究方案:一项多中心研究,比较一种促进乳房重建共同决策的干预措施与常规治疗。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017 Oct 2;17(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0543-0.
9
Patients' views on the use of an Option Grid for knee osteoarthritis in physiotherapy clinical encounters: An interview study.患者对在物理治疗临床就诊中使用膝关节骨关节炎选项网格的看法:一项访谈研究。
Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1302-1310. doi: 10.1111/hex.12570. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
10
Necessary but not sufficient? Engaging young people in the development of an avatar-based online intervention designed to provide psychosocial support to young people affected by their own or a family member's cancer diagnosis.必要但不充分?让年轻人参与基于化身的在线干预措施的开发,该干预措施旨在为受自身或家庭成员癌症诊断影响的年轻人提供心理社会支持。
Health Expect. 2017 Jun;20(3):459-470. doi: 10.1111/hex.12473. Epub 2016 Jun 12.

本文引用的文献

1
Dual equipoise shared decision making: definitions for decision and behaviour support interventions.双重均衡共享决策:决策和行为支持干预措施的定义。
Implement Sci. 2009 Nov 18;4:75. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-75.
2
Arduous implementation: does the Normalisation Process Model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice.艰难实施:规范进程模型能否解释为何将决策支持技术嵌入常规临床实践中如此困难。
Implement Sci. 2008 Dec 31;3:57. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-57.
3
Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.临床实践中实施共同决策的障碍与促进因素:卫生专业人员认知的系统评价更新
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):526-35. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.018. Epub 2008 Aug 26.
4
Implementing breast cancer decision aids in community sites: barriers and resources.在社区场所实施乳腺癌决策辅助工具:障碍与资源
Health Expect. 2008 Mar;11(1):46-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00477.x.
5
Physicians' intentions and use of three patient decision aids.医生对三种患者决策辅助工具的使用意向
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007 Jul 6;7:20. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-7-20.
6
Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options?决策辅助工具与乳腺癌:它们会影响手术选择及对治疗方案的了解吗?
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Mar 20;25(9):1067-73. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.5472.
7
A systematic review of information in decision aids.对决策辅助工具中的信息进行的系统评价。
Health Expect. 2007 Mar;10(1):46-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00420.x.
8
Decision aids in routine practice: lessons from the breast cancer initiative.常规实践中的决策辅助工具:乳腺癌倡议的经验教训。
Health Expect. 2006 Sep;9(3):255-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00393.x.
9
Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process.制定患者决策辅助工具的质量标准框架:在线国际德尔菲共识过程。
BMJ. 2006 Aug 26;333(7565):417. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE. Epub 2006 Aug 14.
10
Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.临床实践中实施共同决策的障碍与促进因素:对卫生专业人员认知的系统评价
Implement Sci. 2006 Aug 9;1:16. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-16.

临床医生对面临乳腺癌手术选择的患者的决策支持干预措施的担忧:理解实施共享决策的挑战。

Clinicians' concerns about decision support interventions for patients facing breast cancer surgery options: understanding the challenge of implementing shared decision-making.

机构信息

Department of Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2011 Jun;14(2):133-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00633.x. Epub 2010 Oct 28.

DOI:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00633.x
PMID:21029281
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5060572/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is interest in interventions that provide support for patients facing challenging decisions, such as the choice between mastectomy and breast conservation surgery for breast cancer. However, it is difficult to implement these interventions. One potential source of resistance is the attitudes of clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

To examine specialist breast clinicians' opinions about the provision of decision support interventions (DesIs) for patients.

METHODS

As part of the development of a web-based DesI (BresDex), semi-structured interviews were conducted with specialist clinicians [breast surgeons, breast care nurses (BCNs) and oncologists] from four breast units in a UK region, and speciality national opinion leaders. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using the Framework approach.

RESULTS

A majority of the 24 clinicians interviewed did not have a working knowledge of DesIs and were ambivalent or sceptical. Many expressed conflicting opinions: they noted the potential benefits, but at the same time expressed reservations about information overlap, overload and about content that they considered inappropriate. Many wanted access to DesIs to be always under clinical supervision. In particular, they were uncertain as regards how DeSIs could be tailored to individual patients' needs and also accommodate clinical practice variation. BCNs were particularly concerned that DesIs might induce patient anxiety and replace their role.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of providing interventions to support patients in decision-making tasks generated concern, defensiveness and scepticism. These attitudes will be a significant barrier. Implementation efforts will need to recognize and address these issues if these interventions are to become embedded in clinical practice.

摘要

背景

人们对提供支持的干预措施感兴趣,这些干预措施为面临艰难决策的患者提供支持,例如乳腺癌患者在乳房切除术和保乳手术之间的选择。然而,实施这些干预措施很困难。潜在的阻力之一是临床医生的态度。

目的

调查专科乳腺临床医生对为患者提供决策支持干预措施(DesIs)的意见。

方法

作为基于网络的决策支持干预措施(BresDex)开发的一部分,对来自英国一个地区的四个乳腺单位的专科乳腺临床医生(乳腺外科医生、乳腺护理护士(BCN)和肿瘤学家)以及专业的国家意见领袖进行了半结构化访谈。使用框架方法对访谈进行记录、转录和分析。

结果

24 名接受采访的临床医生中,大多数人对 DesIs 没有工作知识,他们持矛盾或怀疑态度。许多人表达了相互矛盾的观点:他们注意到潜在的好处,但同时对信息重叠、过载以及他们认为不适当的内容表示保留意见。许多人希望始终在临床监督下获得 DesIs。特别是,他们对如何根据个别患者的需求调整 DeSIs 以及适应临床实践的变化感到不确定。BCN 特别担心,决策支持干预措施可能会引起患者焦虑并取代他们的角色。

结论

提供干预措施以支持患者进行决策任务的概念引起了关注、防御和怀疑。这些态度将是一个重大障碍。如果这些干预措施要嵌入临床实践,实施工作就需要认识到并解决这些问题。