Horrow Caroline, Pacyna Joel E, Cosenza Carol, Sharp Richard R
Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester , Minnesota , USA.
Center for Survey Research, University of Massachusetts Boston , Boston , Massachusetts , USA.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Oct-Dec;10(4):222-230. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1652213. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
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.
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。