Suppr超能文献

患者还是志愿者?试验参与动机对患者决策辅助工具疗效的影响:Cochrane系统评价的二次分析

Patients or volunteers? The impact of motivation for trial participation on the efficacy of patient decision Aids: a secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.

作者信息

Brown James G, Joyce Kerry E, Stacey Dawn, Thomson Richard G

机构信息

Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom (JGB, KEJ, RDT)

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada (DS)

出版信息

Med Decis Making. 2015 May;35(4):419-35. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15579172.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Efficacy of patient decision aids (PtDAs) may be influenced by trial participants' identity either as patients seeking to benefit personally from involvement or as volunteers supporting the research effort.

AIM

To determine if study characteristics indicative of participants' trial identity might influence PtDA efficacy.

METHODS

We undertook exploratory subgroup meta-analysis of the 2011 Cochrane review of PtDAs, including trials that compared PtDA with usual care for treatment decisions. We extracted data on whether participants initiated the care pathway, setting, practitioner interactions, and 6 outcome variables (knowledge, risk perception, decisional conflict, feeling informed, feeling clear about values, and participation). The main subgroup analysis categorized trials as "volunteerism" or "patienthood" on the basis of whether participants initiated the care pathway. A supplementary subgroup analysis categorized trials on the basis of whether any volunteerism factors were present (participants had not initiated the care pathway, had attended a research setting, or had a face-to-face interaction with a researcher).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine trials were included. Compared with volunteerism trials, pooled effect sizes were higher in patienthood trials (where participants initiated the care pathway) for knowledge, decisional conflict, feeling informed, feeling clear, and participation. The subgroup difference was statistically significant for knowledge only (P = 0.03). When trials were compared on the basis of whether volunteerism factors were present, knowledge was significantly greater in patienthood trials (P < 0.001), but there was otherwise no consistent pattern of differences in effects across outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a tendency toward greater PtDA efficacy in trials in which participants initiate the pathway of care. Knowledge acquisition appears to be greater in trials where participants are predominantly patients rather than volunteers.

摘要

背景

患者决策辅助工具(PtDAs)的疗效可能会受到试验参与者身份的影响,这些参与者要么是寻求通过参与获得个人利益的患者,要么是支持研究工作的志愿者。

目的

确定表明参与者试验身份的研究特征是否可能影响PtDAs的疗效。

方法

我们对2011年Cochrane关于PtDAs的综述进行了探索性亚组荟萃分析,纳入了比较PtDAs与常规治疗决策护理的试验。我们提取了关于参与者是否启动护理途径、环境、从业者互动以及6个结果变量(知识、风险认知、决策冲突、感觉了解情况、对价值观感到清晰以及参与度)的数据。主要亚组分析根据参与者是否启动护理途径将试验分类为“志愿性”或“患者身份”。补充亚组分析根据是否存在任何志愿性因素(参与者未启动护理途径、曾在研究环境中、或与研究人员有面对面互动)对试验进行分类。

结果

纳入了29项试验。与志愿性试验相比,在知识、决策冲突、感觉了解情况、感觉清晰和参与度方面,患者身份试验(参与者启动护理途径)的合并效应量更高。仅在知识方面亚组差异具有统计学意义(P = 0.03)。当根据是否存在志愿性因素对试验进行比较时,患者身份试验中的知识显著更高(P < 0.001),但在其他结果方面没有一致的效应差异模式。

结论

在参与者启动护理途径的试验中,PtDAs疗效有提高的趋势。在参与者主要是患者而非志愿者的试验中,知识获取似乎更多。

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