Suppr超能文献

使用观察者OPTION工具比较音频与音频加视频用于肿瘤学共同决策评分的研究:一项探索性分析

Comparison of audio vs. audio + video for the rating of shared decision making in oncology using the observer OPTION instrument: an exploratory analysis.

作者信息

Gionfriddo Michael R, Branda Megan E, Fernandez Cara, Leppin Aaron, Yost Kathleen J, Kimball Brittany, Spencer-Bonilla Gabriela, Larrea Laura, Nowakowski Katherine E, Montori Victor M, Tilburt Jon

机构信息

Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 4;18(1):522. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3329-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

How non-verbal data may influence observer-administered ratings of shared decision making is unknown. Our objective for this exploratory analysis was to determine the effect of mode of data collection (audio+video vs. audio only) on the scoring of the OPTION instrument, an observer rated measure of shared decision making.

METHODS

We analyzed recordings of 15 encounters between cancer patients and clinicians in which a clinical decision was made. Audio+video or audio only recordings of the encounters were randomly assigned to four trained raters, who reviewed them independently. We compared the adjusted mean scores of audio+video and audio only.

RESULTS

Forty-one unique decisions were identified within the 15 encounters. The mean OPTION score for audio+video was 17.5 (95% CI 13.5, 21.6) and for audio only was 21.8 (95% CI 17.2, 26.4) with a mean difference of 4.28 (95% CI = 0.36, 8.21; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

A rigorous and well established measure of shared decision making performs differently when the data source is audio only. Data source may influence rating of observer administered measures of shared decision making. This potential bias needs to be confirmed as video recording to examine communication behaviors becomes more common.

摘要

背景

非语言数据如何影响观察者对共同决策的评分尚不清楚。我们进行这项探索性分析的目的是确定数据收集方式(音频+视频与仅音频)对OPTION工具评分的影响,OPTION工具是一种由观察者评分的共同决策测量方法。

方法

我们分析了15次癌症患者与临床医生之间做出临床决策的会诊记录。会诊的音频+视频记录或仅音频记录被随机分配给四名经过培训的评分者,他们独立进行审查。我们比较了音频+视频和仅音频的调整后平均得分。

结果

在15次会诊中确定了41个独特的决策。音频+视频的OPTION平均得分为17.5(95%置信区间13.5, 21.6),仅音频的平均得分为21.8(95%置信区间17.2, 26.4),平均差异为4.28(95%置信区间=0.36, 8.21;p = 0.032)。

结论

当数据来源仅为音频时,一种严格且成熟的共同决策测量方法的表现会有所不同。数据来源可能会影响观察者对共同决策的测量评分。随着用于检查沟通行为的视频记录变得更加普遍,这种潜在偏差需要得到证实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a46e/6033223/614c64fa9ef0/12913_2018_3329_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