• 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

对医疗保健产生影响的参与:瑞典公众的看法。

Involvement that makes an impact on healthcare: Perceptions of the Swedish public.

机构信息

1 Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden.

2 Department of Sociology and Policy, Aston University, UK.

出版信息

Scand J Public Health. 2018 Jun;46(4):471-477. doi: 10.1177/1403494817738692. Epub 2017 Nov 1.

DOI:10.1177/1403494817738692
PMID:29090622
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5989250/
Abstract

AIM

'Participation and influence in society' is the first of 11 objective domains in Swedish public health policy. The aim of this article is to investigate the views of the Swedish general population on the impact of a range of health participation activities, and whether these views were associated with sociodemographic characteristics.

METHODS

The study utilizes a national representative survey of the Swedish population, aged 15 years and over ( n = 1500).

RESULTS

Apart from voting in regional elections - which most of the respondents believed to be an influential way to make improvements in healthcare (74%) - respondents believed more in individual patient activities than activities associated with adopting a citizen role and acting collectively. A majority of respondents believed in the impact of replying to patient surveys (67%), making a complaint (61%), talking directly to staff (58%) or changing their healthcare provider (54%). Fewer believed in the impact of joining a patient organization (46%), taking part in a citizen council (35%) or joining a political party (34%). Beliefs in impact increased with educational attainment and decreased with age.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest people have more confidence in the impact of participating as individual patients rather than collectively and as citizens. To ensure that activities enable 'participation and influence in society', complementary opportunities for collective involvement that also take into account under-represented voices such as those with a low level of education need to be developed.

摘要

目的

“参与和影响社会”是瑞典公共卫生政策 11 个目标领域中的第一个。本文旨在调查瑞典普通民众对一系列健康参与活动的影响的看法,以及这些看法是否与社会人口特征有关。

方法

本研究利用全国代表性调查,调查了年龄在 15 岁及以上的瑞典人口(n=1500)。

结果

除了投票参加地区选举——大多数受访者认为这是改善医疗保健的一种有影响力的方式(74%)——受访者更相信个人患者活动,而不是与承担公民角色和集体行动相关的活动。大多数受访者认为回复患者调查(67%)、投诉(61%)、直接与员工交谈(58%)或更换医疗服务提供者(54%)会产生影响。较少的人认为加入患者组织(46%)、参加公民委员会(35%)或加入政党(34%)会产生影响。信念的影响随着教育程度的提高而增加,随着年龄的增长而减少。

结论

结果表明,人们对作为个体患者参与而不是集体和作为公民参与的影响更有信心。为了确保活动能够“参与和影响社会”,需要开发补充的集体参与机会,同时考虑到代表性不足的声音,如教育程度较低的人的声音。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/69df/5989250/9d6ba2845997/10.1177_1403494817738692-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/69df/5989250/9d6ba2845997/10.1177_1403494817738692-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/69df/5989250/9d6ba2845997/10.1177_1403494817738692-fig1.jpg

相似文献

1
Involvement that makes an impact on healthcare: Perceptions of the Swedish public.对医疗保健产生影响的参与:瑞典公众的看法。
Scand J Public Health. 2018 Jun;46(4):471-477. doi: 10.1177/1403494817738692. Epub 2017 Nov 1.
2
Getting involved: the extent and impact of patient and public involvement in the Swedish health system.参与:瑞典卫生系统中患者和公众参与的程度和影响。
Health Econ Policy Law. 2020 Jul;15(3):325-340. doi: 10.1017/S174413311900015X. Epub 2019 May 3.
3
Public involvement in the Swedish health system: citizen dialogues with unclear outcomes.公众参与瑞典卫生系统:公民对话,结果不明。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Sep 4;23(1):947. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09947-x.
4
Who wants to be involved in health care decisions? Comparing preferences for individual and collective involvement in England and Sweden.谁希望参与医疗保健决策?比较英国和瑞典对个人参与和集体参与的偏好。
BMC Public Health. 2017 Jul 14;18(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4534-y.
5
The paradox of public participation in the healthcare in Poland--what citizens want, and what they think.波兰医疗保健领域公众参与的悖论——公民想要什么以及他们的想法。
Health Policy. 2014 Nov;118(2):159-65. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.09.015. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
6
Neighbourhood development and public health initiatives: who participates?邻里发展和公共卫生举措:谁参与?
Health Promot Int. 2012 Mar;27(1):102-16. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar024. Epub 2011 Apr 22.
7
Public dialogue on healthcare prioritisation.关于医疗保健优先事项的公众对话。
Health Policy. 2006 Nov;79(1):107-16. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.11.015. Epub 2006 Jan 18.
8
Japan as the front-runner of super-aged societies: Perspectives from medicine and medical care in Japan.日本作为超老龄化社会的领跑者:来自日本医学与医疗护理的视角
Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2015 Jun;15(6):673-87. doi: 10.1111/ggi.12450. Epub 2015 Feb 5.
9
Epidemiology of participation: an Australian community study.参与的流行病学:一项澳大利亚社区研究。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 Jun;54(6):414-23. doi: 10.1136/jech.54.6.414.
10
Participation and the right to health: lessons from Indonesia.参与和健康权:来自印度尼西亚的经验教训。
Health Hum Rights. 2009;11(1):49-59.

引用本文的文献

1
Involvement of service user representatives on a healthcare organizational level at Norwegian Healthy Life Centres: A qualitative study exploring health professionals' experiences.在挪威健康生活中心的医疗保健组织层面上让服务使用者代表参与:一项探索健康专业人员经验的定性研究。
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 3;18(8):e0289544. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289544. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Disentangling patient and public involvement in healthcare decisions: why the difference matters.理清患者和公众在医疗决策中的参与:为何差异至关重要。
Sociol Health Illn. 2017 Jan;39(1):95-111. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12483. Epub 2016 Nov 11.
2
Measuring social capital: further insights.衡量社会资本:进一步的见解。
Gac Sanit. 2017 Jan-Feb;31(1):57-61. doi: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2016.09.002. Epub 2016 Oct 26.
3
From tokenism to empowerment: progressing patient and public involvement in healthcare improvement.从象征主义到赋权:推动患者及公众参与医疗保健改善
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Aug;25(8):626-32. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004839. Epub 2016 Mar 18.
4
Patient involvement in Europe--a comparative framework.欧洲的患者参与——一个比较框架。
J Health Organ Manag. 2015;29(5):546-55. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-05-2015-0078.
5
PPI: understanding the difference between patient and public involvement.患者与公众参与(PPI):理解两者之间的差异
Am J Bioeth. 2014;14(6):25-6. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2014.900144.
6
Patient and family engagement: a framework for understanding the elements and developing interventions and policies.患者和家属参与:理解要素、制定干预措施和政策的框架。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):223-31. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1133.
7
Is patient choice democratizing Swedish primary care?患者选择是否使瑞典初级医疗民主化?
Health Policy. 2013 Jun;111(1):95-8. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.12.002. Epub 2013 Jan 3.
8
The impact of patient and public involvement on UK NHS health care: a systematic review.患者和公众参与对英国国民保健制度医疗保健的影响:系统评价。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2012 Feb;24(1):28-38. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr066. Epub 2011 Nov 22.
9
Social capital and health--implications for health promotion.社会资本与健康——对健康促进的启示。
Glob Health Action. 2011 Feb 8;4:5611. doi: 10.3402/gha.v4i0.5611.
10
Public health policies: a Scandinavian model?公共卫生政策:一种斯堪的纳维亚模式?
Scand J Public Health. 2007;35(2):205-11. doi: 10.1080/14034940600858433.