• 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
"It's Valid and Reliable" Is Not Enough: Critical Appraisal of Reporting of Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.“它有效且可靠”是不够的：对评估患者决策辅助工具的试验中测量指标报告的批判性评价
Med Decis Making. 2014 Jul;34(5):560-6. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14528381. Epub 2014 Apr 8.
2
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Oct 5(10):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub3.
3
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人群提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 8(3):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub2.
4
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临健康治疗或筛查决策的人群提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 28(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4.
5
Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.患者介导的干预措施以改善专业实践。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 11;9(9):CD012472. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012472.pub2.
6
Shared decision-making for people with asthma.哮喘患者的共同决策
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 3;10(10):CD012330. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012330.pub2.
7
Interventions for supporting pregnant women's decision-making about mode of birth after a caesarean.支持剖宫产术后孕妇做出分娩方式决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 30;2013(7):CD010041. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010041.pub2.
8
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 12;4(4):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
9
The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments.医疗机构内协作的测量：对测量工具属性的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):138-97. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159.
10
Do peer reviewers comment on reporting items as instructed by the journal? A secondary analysis of two randomized trials.同行评审员是否按照期刊的要求对报告项目进行评论？两项随机试验的二次分析。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 May 8;183:111818. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111818.

引用本文的文献

1
Development and Psychometric Testing of EPAT-16: A Short and Valid Measure for Patient-Centeredness From the Patient's Perspective.EPAT - 16的开发与心理测量测试：一种从患者视角衡量以患者为中心的简短且有效的方法。
Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70296. doi: 10.1111/hex.70296.
2
Translation and Psychometric Evaluation in Cancer Care of the German Version of collaboRATE-a 3-item Patient-reported Measure of Shared Decision-Making.collaboRATE德文版在癌症护理中的翻译及心理测量评估——一项用于衡量共同决策的3项患者报告指标
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70255. doi: 10.1111/hex.70255.
3
A scoping review of web-based, interactive, personalized decision-making tools available to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care.一项关于基于网络的交互式个性化决策工具的范围综述，这些工具可用于支持乳腺癌治疗及生存护理。
J Cancer Surviv. 2024 Mar 28. doi: 10.1007/s11764-024-01567-6.
4
A Scoping Review of Personalized, Interactive, Web-Based Clinical Decision Tools Available for Breast Cancer Prevention and Screening in the United States.美国可用于乳腺癌预防和筛查的个性化、交互式、基于网络的临床决策工具的范围综述
MDM Policy Pract. 2024 Mar 17;9(1):23814683241236511. doi: 10.1177/23814683241236511. eCollection 2024 Jan-Jun.
5
Evaluation of the psychometric performance of the Spanish and Catalan versions of the patient reported experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC)-Compact questionnaire.评价初级保健中患者报告的安全性体验和结果（PREOS-PC）-简明问卷的西班牙文和加泰罗尼亚文版本的心理测量性能。
Eur J Gen Pract. 2024 Dec;30(1):2296573. doi: 10.1080/13814788.2023.2296573. Epub 2024 Jan 10.
6
Do patient decision aids help people who are facing decisions about solid organ transplantation? A systematic review.患者决策辅助工具是否有助于面临实体器官移植决策的人？系统评价。
Clin Transplant. 2023 Apr;37(4):e14928. doi: 10.1111/ctr.14928. Epub 2023 Feb 19.
7
Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.我们是否在改进？评价患者决策辅助工具评估试验中决策过程和质量措施报告的更新和批判性评价。
Med Decis Making. 2021 Oct;41(7):954-959. doi: 10.1177/0272989X211011120. Epub 2021 May 8.
8
Potential Unintended Consequences Of Recent Shared Decision Making Policy Initiatives.近期共享决策政策倡议的潜在意外后果。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Nov;38(11):1876-1881. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00243.
9
Assessment of patient centredness through patient-reported experience measures (ASPIRED): protocol of a mixed-methods study.通过患者报告体验指标评估以患者为中心程度（ASPIRED）：一项混合方法研究的方案
BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 21;8(10):e025896. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025896.
10
A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke.一种用于选择纳入离散选择实验的属性的新颖设计过程：探索急性缺血性中风治疗中溶栓临床决策差异的案例研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jun 22;18(1):483. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3305-5.

本文引用的文献

1
Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments.确立患者决策辅助工具的有效性：关键构建和测量工具。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S12. Epub 2013 Nov 29.
2
Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension.报告随机试验中患者报告结局的方法：CONSORT PRO 扩展。
JAMA. 2013 Feb 27;309(8):814-22. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.879.
3
Shared decision making to improve care and reduce costs.通过共同决策改善医疗服务并降低成本。
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jan 3;368(1):6-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1209500.
4
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Oct 5(10):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub3.
5
Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments.共同决策的测量——工具综述
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011;105(4):313-24. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.012. Epub 2011 May 4.
6
Grid-enabled measures: using Science 2.0 to standardize measures and share data.网格启用措施：利用科学 2.0 来标准化措施并共享数据。
Am J Prev Med. 2011 May;40(5 Suppl 2):S134-43. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.01.004.
7
Contextual factors in shared decision making: a randomised controlled trial in women with a strong suspicion of breast cancer.
Br J Cancer. 2009 Feb 24;100(4):590-7. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604916. Epub 2009 Feb 10.
8
Appraisal of primary outcome measures used in trials of patient decision support.患者决策支持试验中使用的主要结局指标评估。
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):497-503. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.011. Epub 2008 Aug 12.
9
Validity of measures is no simple matter.测量的有效性并非易事。
Health Serv Res. 2005 Oct;40(5 Pt 2):1584-604. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00443.x.
10
Medscape's response to the Institute of Medicine Report: Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century.Medscape对医学研究所报告《跨越质量鸿沟：21世纪的新卫生系统》的回应。
MedGenMed. 2001 Mar 5;3(2):2.

“它有效且可靠”是不够的：对评估患者决策辅助工具的试验中测量指标报告的批判性评价

"It's Valid and Reliable" Is Not Enough: Critical Appraisal of Reporting of Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids.

作者信息

Sepucha Karen R, Matlock Daniel D, Wills Celia E, Ropka Mary, Joseph-Williams Natalie, Stacey Dawn, Ng ChirkJenn, Levin Carrie, Lally Joanne, Borkhoff Cornelia M, Thomson Richard

机构信息

General Medicine Division, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (KS)

University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO (DDM)The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH (CEW)

出版信息

Med Decis Making. 2014 Jul;34(5):560-6. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14528381. Epub 2014 Apr 8.

DOI:10.1177/0272989X14528381
PMID:24713692
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4190105/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

This review systematically appraises the quality of reporting of measures used in trials to evaluate the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and presents recommendations for minimum reporting standards.

METHODS

We reviewed measures of decision quality and decision process in 86 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 reviewers.

RESULTS

Information from 178 instances of use of measures was abstracted. Very few studies reported data on the performance of measures, with reliability (21%) and validity (16%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance. The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Very little is reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards are proposed to enable authors to prepare study reports, editors and reviewers to evaluate submitted papers, and readers to appraise published studies.

摘要

背景

本综述系统评估了用于评估患者决策辅助工具（PtDAs）有效性的试验中所使用测量方法的报告质量，并提出了最低报告标准的建议。

方法

我们回顾了2011年Cochrane协作网关于PtDAs的系统综述中86项随机对照试验（RCT）的决策质量和决策过程测量方法。两名评审员独立提取了关于测量方法的开发、信度、效度、反应度、精度、可解释性、可行性和可接受性的数据。

结果

提取了178次测量方法使用实例的信息。很少有研究报告测量方法的性能数据，其中信度（21%）和效度（16%）是最常报告的。使用新测量方法的研究不太可能包含其心理测量性能的信息。本综述仅限于Cochrane综述中纳入研究的测量方法报告，未查阅先前的出版物。

结论

在已发表的试验中，关于用于评估PtDAs有效性的测量方法的开发或性能的报告非常少。提出了最低报告标准，以使作者能够撰写研究报告，编辑和评审员能够评估提交的论文，读者能够评价已发表的研究。