• 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
Patient Decision Aids for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.结直肠癌筛查的患者决策辅助工具:系统评价与荟萃分析
Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov;51(5):779-791. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.022. Epub 2016 Sep 2.
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们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(3):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.
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.
5
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.
6
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of computer and other electronic aids for smoking cessation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.计算机和其他电子戒烟辅助手段的有效性和成本效益:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(38):1-205, iii-v. doi: 10.3310/hta16380.
7
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.
8
Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation.结直肠癌的化学预防:系统评价和经济评估。
Health Technol Assess. 2010 Jun;14(32):1-206. doi: 10.3310/hta14320.
9
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. 2003(2):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.
10
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.心理健康问题患者的共同决策干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Dissemination of colorectal cancer information among Hispanic patients and their social network.西班牙语裔患者及其社交网络中结直肠癌信息的传播。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Sep 27;24(1):2616. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20095-7.
2
Comparative Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Cancer-Screening Decision Making: An Overview of Reviews.癌症筛查决策辅助工具的比较效果:综述概述
J Gen Intern Med. 2024 Dec;39(16):3299-3314. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-09001-4. Epub 2024 Sep 4.
3
Patient-Provider Communication and Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion Using Multi-target Stool DNA Testing.患者与医疗服务提供者的沟通以及使用多靶点粪便DNA检测完成结直肠癌筛查
J Cancer Educ. 2025 Feb;40(1):115-123. doi: 10.1007/s13187-024-02479-w. Epub 2024 Jul 20.
4
Limited English proficiency and reported receipt of colorectal cancer screening among adults 45-75 in 2019 and 2021.2019年和2021年45至75岁成年人的英语水平有限以及报告的接受结直肠癌筛查情况。
Prev Med Rep. 2024 Feb 4;39:102638. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102638. eCollection 2024 Mar.
5
A Qualitative Exploration of Stakeholders' Preferences for Early-Stage Rectal Cancer Treatment.利益相关者对早期直肠癌治疗偏好的定性探索
Ann Surg Open. 2023 Dec 14;4(4):e364. doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000364. eCollection 2023 Dec.
6
Attitudes and Experiential Factors Associated with Completion of mt-sDNA Test Kit for Colorectal Cancer Screening.与完成用于结直肠癌筛查的线粒体DNA检测试剂盒相关的态度和体验因素。
J Patient Exp. 2023 Nov 22;10:23743735231213765. doi: 10.1177/23743735231213765. eCollection 2023.
7
Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening.癌症筛查共同决策工具的混合方法系统评价与荟萃分析
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jul 29;15(15):3867. doi: 10.3390/cancers15153867.
8
Men's Perception of Being Invited for Prostate Cancer Testing and the Information About Its Pros and Cons-A Survey from Two Population-based Testing Programmes.男性对受邀进行前列腺癌检测及其利弊信息的认知——来自两项基于人群的检测项目的调查
Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023 May 2;52:66-71. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.012. eCollection 2023 Jun.
9
The COMPASS study: A prospective, randomized, multi-center trial testing the impact of a clinic-based intervention informing patients of colorectal cancer screening options on screening completion.COMPASS 研究:一项前瞻性、随机、多中心试验,旨在测试基于诊所的干预措施对告知患者结直肠癌筛查选择对筛查完成的影响。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2022 Aug;119:106852. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106852. Epub 2022 Jul 13.
10
Opportunities and Challenges When Using the Electronic Health Record for Practice-Integrated Patient-Facing Interventions: The e-Assist Colon Health Randomized Trial.利用电子健康记录进行实践整合型面向患者的干预措施时的机遇与挑战:e-Assist 结肠健康随机试验。
Med Decis Making. 2022 Nov;42(8):985-998. doi: 10.1177/0272989X221104094. Epub 2022 Jun 28.

本文引用的文献

1
Health literacy and computer-assisted instruction: usability and patient preference.健康素养与计算机辅助教学:可用性与患者偏好
J Health Commun. 2015 Apr;20(4):491-8. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2014.976322. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
2
Does access to a colorectal cancer screening website and/or a nurse-managed telephone help line provided to patients by their family physician increase fecal occult blood test uptake?: results from a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.家庭医生为患者提供结直肠癌筛查网站和/或护士管理的电话帮助热线,是否会增加粪便潜血试验的接受率?一项实用整群随机对照试验的结果
BMC Cancer. 2014 Apr 16;14:263. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-263.
3
Ten years of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: evolution of the core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision aids.国际患者决策辅助标准协作十年:评估患者决策辅助工具质量的核心维度的演变。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S1. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S1. Epub 2013 Nov 29.
4
Challenges in meeting Healthy People 2020 objectives for cancer-related preventive services, National Health Interview Survey, 2008 and 2010.2008 年和 2010 年全国健康访谈调查:实现《2020 年健康人》癌症相关预防服务目标的挑战。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2014 Feb 27;11:E29. doi: 10.5888/pcd11.130174.
5
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.
6
Cancer screening in the United States, 2014: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening.美国 2014 年癌症筛查:对当前美国癌症协会指南和癌症筛查当前问题的回顾。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Jan-Feb;64(1):30-51. doi: 10.3322/caac.21212. Epub 2014 Jan 9.
7
Toward Minimum Standards for Certifying Patient Decision Aids: A Modified Delphi Consensus Process.迈向患者决策辅助工具认证的最低标准:一种改进的德尔菲共识过程。
Med Decis Making. 2014 Aug;34(6):699-710. doi: 10.1177/0272989X13501721. Epub 2013 Aug 20.
8
Reach, usage, and effectiveness of a Medicaid patient navigator intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening, Cape Fear, North Carolina, 2011.一项针对医疗补助患者导航员干预措施以增加结直肠癌筛查的使用情况和效果的研究,北卡罗来纳州海角恐惧地区,2011 年。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2013 May 23;10:E82. doi: 10.5888/pcd10.120221.
9
Informed decision-making in colorectal cancer screening using colonoscopy or CT-colonography.结直肠癌筛查中结肠镜或 CT 结肠成像的知情决策。
Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Jun;91(3):318-25. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.01.004. Epub 2013 Feb 8.
10
Aid-assisted decision making and colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.辅助决策和结直肠癌筛查:一项随机对照试验。
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Dec;43(6):573-83. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.08.018.

结直肠癌筛查的患者决策辅助工具:系统评价与荟萃分析

Patient Decision Aids for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

作者信息

Volk Robert J, Linder Suzanne K, Lopez-Olivo Maria A, Kamath Geetanjali R, Reuland Daniel S, Saraykar Smita S, Leal Viola B, Pignone Michael P

机构信息

Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.

Division of Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas.

出版信息

Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov;51(5):779-791. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.022. Epub 2016 Sep 2.

DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.022
PMID:27593418
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5067222/
Abstract

CONTEXT

Decision aids prepare patients to make decisions about healthcare options consistent with their preferences. Helping patients choose among available options for colorectal cancer screening is important because rates are lower than screening for other cancers. This systematic review describes studies evaluating patient decision aids for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk adults and their impact on knowledge, screening intentions, and uptake.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Sources included Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, Ovid PsycINFO through July 21, 2015, pertinent reference lists, and Cochrane review of patient decisions aids. Reviewers independently selected studies that quantitatively evaluated a decision aid compared to one or more conditions or within a pre-post evaluation. Using a standardized form, reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, interventions, comparators, and outcomes. Analysis was conducted in August 2015.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twenty-three articles representing 21 trials including 11,900 subjects were eligible. Patients exposed to a decision aid showed greater knowledge than those exposed to a control condition (mean difference=18.3 of 100; 95% CI=15.5, 21.1), were more likely to be interested in screening (pooled relative risk=1.5; 95% CI=1.2, 2.0), and more likely to be screened (pooled relative risk=1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.4). Decision aid patients had greater knowledge than patients receiving general colorectal cancer screening information (pooled mean difference=19.3 of 100; 95% CI=14.7, 23.8); however, there were no significant differences in screening interest or behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision aids improve knowledge and interest in screening, and lead to increased screening over no information, but their impact on screening is similar to general colorectal cancer screening information.

摘要

背景

决策辅助工具帮助患者根据自身偏好对医疗保健选项做出决策。帮助患者在结直肠癌筛查的可用选项中进行选择很重要,因为其筛查率低于其他癌症的筛查率。本系统评价描述了评估平均风险成年人结直肠癌筛查患者决策辅助工具及其对知识、筛查意愿和接受度影响的研究。

证据获取

资料来源包括截至2015年7月21日的Ovid MEDLINE、爱思唯尔EMBASE、EBSCO CINAHL Plus、Ovid PsycINFO、相关参考文献列表以及Cochrane患者决策辅助工具评价。评审人员独立选择与一种或多种对照条件进行比较或在前后评估中对决策辅助工具进行定量评估的研究。评审人员使用标准化表格独立提取研究特征、干预措施、对照和结果。分析于2015年8月进行。

证据综合

23篇文章代表21项试验,包括11900名受试者,符合入选标准。接触决策辅助工具的患者比接触对照条件的患者知识更丰富(平均差异为100分中的18.3分;95%置信区间=15.5,21.1),对筛查更感兴趣(合并相对风险=1.5;95%置信区间=1.2,2.0),且更有可能接受筛查(合并相对风险=1.3;95%置信区间=1.1,1.4)。使用决策辅助工具的患者比接受一般结直肠癌筛查信息的患者知识更丰富(合并平均差异为100分中的19.3分;95%置信区间=14.7,23.8);然而,在筛查兴趣或行为方面没有显著差异。

结论

决策辅助工具可提高对筛查的知识和兴趣,并导致筛查率高于无信息组,但它们对筛查的影响与一般结直肠癌筛查信息相似。