Suppr超能文献

针对人们评估治疗效果相关声明所需了解的关键概念的干预措施和评估工具:一项系统映射综述

Interventions and assessment tools addressing key concepts people need to know to appraise claims about treatment effects: a systematic mapping review.

作者信息

Austvoll-Dahlgren Astrid, Nsangi Allen, Semakula Daniel

机构信息

Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, BOKS 7004 St. Olavsplass, 0130, Oslo, Norway.

Makerere University College of Health Sciences, New Mulago Hospital Complex, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda.

出版信息

Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 29;5(1):215. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0389-z.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

People's ability to appraise claims about treatment effects is crucial for informed decision-making. Our objective was to systematically map this area of research in order to (a) provide an overview of interventions targeting key concepts that people need to understand to assess treatment claims and (b) to identify assessment tools used to evaluate people's understanding of these concepts. The findings of this review provide a starting point for decisions about which key concepts to address when developing new interventions, and which assessment tools should be considered.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic mapping review of interventions and assessment tools addressing key concepts important for people to be able to assess treatment claims. A systematic literature search was done by a reserach librarian in relevant databases. Judgement about inclusion of studies and data collection was done by at least two researchers. We included all quantitative study designs targeting one or more of the key concepts, and targeting patients, healthy members of the public, and health professionals. The studies were divided into four categories: risk communication and decision aids, evidence-based medicine and critical appraisal, understanding of controlled trials, and science education. Findings were summarised descriptively.

RESULTS

We included 415 studies, of which the interventions and assessment tools we identified included only a handful of the key concepts. The most common key concepts in interventions were "Treatments usually have beneficial and harmful effects," "Treatment comparisons should be fair," "Compare like with like," and "Single studies can be misleading." A variety of assessment tools were identified, but only four assessment tools included 10 or more key concepts.

CONCLUSIONS

There is great potential for developing learning and assessment tools targeting key concepts that people need to understand to assess claims about treatment effects. There is currently no instrument covering assessment of all these key concepts.

摘要

背景

人们评估有关治疗效果的说法的能力对于做出明智的决策至关重要。我们的目标是系统地梳理这一研究领域,以便(a)概述针对人们评估治疗效果说法所需理解的关键概念的干预措施,以及(b)识别用于评估人们对这些概念理解的评估工具。本综述的结果为在开发新干预措施时决定应解决哪些关键概念以及应考虑哪些评估工具提供了一个起点。

方法

我们对针对人们评估治疗效果说法所需理解的关键概念的干预措施和评估工具进行了系统的梳理综述。由一名研究馆员在相关数据库中进行系统的文献检索。至少两名研究人员对研究的纳入和数据收集进行判断。我们纳入了所有针对一个或多个关键概念、针对患者、公众健康成员和卫生专业人员的定量研究设计。这些研究分为四类:风险沟通与决策辅助工具、循证医学与批判性评价、对对照试验的理解以及科学教育。研究结果进行了描述性总结。

结果

我们纳入了415项研究,其中我们识别出的干预措施和评估工具仅涵盖了少数关键概念。干预措施中最常见的关键概念是“治疗通常有有益和有害的效果”、“治疗比较应该公平”、“同类相比”以及“单个研究可能会产生误导”。识别出了多种评估工具,但只有四种评估工具包含10个或更多关键概念。

结论

开发针对人们评估治疗效果说法所需理解的关键概念的学习和评估工具具有很大潜力。目前尚无涵盖所有这些关键概念评估的工具。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/54b0/5200965/27d8132a050d/13643_2016_389_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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