• 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
Examining Physician Interactions with Disease Advocacy Organizations.审视医生与疾病倡导组织的互动。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Oct-Dec;10(4):222-230. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1652213. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
2
The financing of clinical genetics research by disease advocacy organizations: A review of funding disclosures in biomedical journals.疾病倡导组织资助临床遗传学研究:生物医学期刊中资助披露的综述。
Am J Med Genet A. 2010 Dec;152A(12):3051-6. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.33767.
3
Doctors on Values and Advocacy: A Qualitative and Evaluative Study.医生的价值观与倡导:一项定性与评估研究
Health Care Anal. 2017 Dec;25(4):370-385. doi: 10.1007/s10728-016-0322-6.
4
An Intergenerational Conversation about Frustrations, Lessons, and Hope in Physician Activism.关于医生维权行动中的挫折、经验教训与希望的跨代对话。
AMA J Ethics. 2015 May 1;17(5):465-8. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.5.mnar1-1505.
5
The agency problem and medical acting: an example of applying economic theory to medical ethics.代理问题与医疗行为:将经济理论应用于医学伦理学的一个实例。
Med Health Care Philos. 2009 Mar;12(1):99-108. doi: 10.1007/s11019-008-9138-y. Epub 2008 May 10.
6
Prevalence and Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest in Dermatology Patient Advocacy Organizations.皮肤科患者倡导组织中潜在利益冲突的流行和披露。
JAMA Dermatol. 2019 Apr 1;155(4):460-464. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.5102.
7
Public roles of US physicians: community participation, political involvement, and collective advocacy.美国医生的公共角色:社区参与、政治参与和集体倡导。
JAMA. 2006 Nov 22;296(20):2467-75. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.20.2467.
8
Bridging dermatologists with patient advocacy organizations through smartphones.通过智能手机将皮肤科医生与患者权益组织联系起来。
JAMA Dermatol. 2014 Mar;150(3):297-302. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7027.
9
Refining a definition of medical professionalism.完善医学职业精神的定义。
Acad Med. 2014 Dec;89(12):1579. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000527.
10
Refining a definition of medical professionalism.完善医学职业精神的定义。
Acad Med. 2014 Dec;89(12):1579. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000511.

本文引用的文献

1
Patient Voice in Rare Disease Drug Development and Endpoints.罕见病药物研发与终点中的患者声音。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2017 Mar;51(2):257-263. doi: 10.1177/2168479016671559. Epub 2016 Nov 4.
2
Conflicts of Interest for Patient-Advocacy Organizations.患者权益倡导组织的利益冲突
N Engl J Med. 2017 Mar 2;376(9):880-885. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsr1610625.
3
Patient Advocacy Organizations, Industry Funding, and Conflicts of Interest.患者倡导组织、行业资助与利益冲突。
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Mar 1;177(3):344-350. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8443.
4
Rare Diseases on the Internet: An Assessment of the Quality of Online Information.互联网上的罕见病:在线信息质量评估
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jan 18;19(1):e23. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7056.
5
Perspectives on Self-Advocacy: Comparing Perceived Uses, Benefits, and Drawbacks Among Survivors and Providers.自我倡导的观点:比较幸存者与提供者对其感知到的用途、益处及弊端
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2017 Jan 3;44(1):52-59. doi: 10.1188/17.ONF.52-59.
6
Industry Funding of Cancer Patient Advocacy Organizations.癌症患者权益倡导组织的行业资助。
Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Nov;91(11):1668-1670. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.08.015.
7
Patient Engagement Practices in Clinical Research among Patient Groups, Industry, and Academia in the United States: A Survey.美国患者群体、行业和学术界临床研究中的患者参与实践:一项调查
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 14;10(10):e0140232. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140232. eCollection 2015.
8
Going for the cure: patient interest groups and health advocacy in the United States.寻求治愈之道:美国的患者利益集团与健康倡导活动
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2014 Apr;39(2):331-67. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2416238. Epub 2013 Dec 4.
9
The role of patient advocacy/parent support groups.患者倡导/家长支持团体的作用。
S Afr Med J. 2013 Oct 11;103(12 Suppl 1):1020-2. doi: 10.7196/samj.6976.
10
Patient advocacy organizations: institutional conflicts of interest, trust, and trustworthiness.患者倡导组织:制度性利益冲突、信任和值得信赖。
J Law Med Ethics. 2013 Fall;41(3):680-7. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12078.

审视医生与疾病倡导组织的互动。

Examining Physician Interactions with Disease Advocacy Organizations.

作者信息

Horrow Caroline, Pacyna Joel E, Cosenza Carol, Sharp Richard R

机构信息

Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester , Minnesota , USA.

Center for Survey Research, University of Massachusetts Boston , Boston , Massachusetts , USA.

出版信息

AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Oct-Dec;10(4):222-230. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1652213. Epub 2019 Aug 26.

DOI:10.1080/23294515.2019.1652213
PMID:31449475
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7259376/
Abstract

Disease advocacy organizations (DAOs) have traditionally focused on raising awareness of rare diseases, providing educational resources to patients, and supporting patients and families. Previous research has described how scientists collaborate with DAOs, but few empirical data are available regarding the extent to which physicians interact with DAOs and how those interactions impact patient care. We conducted a national survey of 230 board-certified pediatric neurologists to assess their engagement with DAOs and their beliefs about the impact of DAOs on patient care. In that context, we evaluated a set of 24 items describing interactions between physicians and DAOs. Exploratory factor analysis produced a 19-item model capturing four types of physician-DAO engagement: (1) accessing or distributing DAO-produced materials (6 items, alpha = 0.80); (2) consulting on DAO activities (5 items, alpha = 0.81); (3) collaborating with DAOs on research activities (6 items, alpha = 0.80); and (4) co-producing scholarly materials with DAOs (2 items, alpha = 0.80). Our data indicate that physicians engage with DAOs in more frequent and diverse ways than has been previously reported. Almost all physicians in our sample had interacted directly with a DAO in some way, from low-effort activities such as visiting a DAO's website to deeper forms of engagement including coauthoring journal articles. These findings may provide a framework for bioethicists to characterize the nature and extent of physician interactions with advocacy organizations, which is critical for evaluating the ethical implications of physician-DAO relationships.

摘要

疾病倡导组织(DAO)传统上专注于提高对罕见病的认识,为患者提供教育资源,并支持患者及其家庭。先前的研究描述了科学家如何与DAO合作,但关于医生与DAO互动的程度以及这些互动如何影响患者护理的实证数据却很少。我们对230名获得董事会认证的儿科神经科医生进行了一项全国性调查,以评估他们与DAO的参与情况以及他们对DAO对患者护理影响的看法。在此背景下,我们评估了一组描述医生与DAO之间互动的24个项目。探索性因素分析产生了一个包含19个项目的模型,该模型捕捉了四种医生与DAO的参与类型:(1)获取或分发DAO制作的材料(6个项目,α = 0.80);(2)就DAO活动提供咨询(5个项目,α = 0.81);(3)在研究活动中与DAO合作(6个项目,α = 0.80);以及(4)与DAO共同制作学术材料(2个项目,α = 0.80)。我们的数据表明,医生与DAO的互动比以前报道的更加频繁和多样化。我们样本中的几乎所有医生都以某种方式直接与DAO进行了互动,从访问DAO网站等低投入活动到包括共同撰写期刊文章在内的更深层次的参与形式。这些发现可能为生物伦理学家提供一个框架,以描述医生与倡导组织互动的性质和程度,这对于评估医生与DAO关系的伦理影响至关重要。