• 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

奥地利成年社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)服务使用者基于人群的偏好权重:最佳-最差实验的结果

Population-based preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) for service users for Austria: Findings from a best-worst experiment.

作者信息

Hajji Assma, Trukeschitz Birgit, Malley Juliette, Batchelder Laurie, Saloniki Eirini, Linnosmaa Ismo, Lu Hui

机构信息

Research Institute for Economics of Aging, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria.

Research Institute for Economics of Aging, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria.

出版信息

Soc Sci Med. 2020 Apr;250:112792. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112792. Epub 2020 Jan 7.

DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112792
PMID:32114259
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) measures quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes of long-term care (LTC) service provision. Country-specific preference weights are required to calculate ASCOT scores. ASCOT has been translated into German, but lacks preference weights for German-speaking countries.

OBJECTIVES

This paper aims to establish Austrian preference weights for the German version of the ASCOT service user measure, using best-worst scaling (BWS).

METHODS

Data were collected using an online BWS-experiment from a general population sample (n=1,000) of Austrian adults. We use a scale-adjusted multinomial logit model (S-MNL) accounting for positioning effects to estimate preference weights.

RESULTS

Austrians value the top attribute-levels in the ASCOT domains 'being meaningfully occupied during the day' and 'having control over daily life' most highly, whereas high needs were the least preferred in the domains 'dignity' and 'social participation'. From a methods perspective, we found significant positioning effects only for 'best' choices, with statements at the top of a list being picked more often than those further down in the list. Factors related to survey completion (self-assessed understanding of the tasks and survey completion time) were shown to have the greatest effect on individual choice consistency.

DISCUSSION

The paper provides Austrian preference weights for the German version of ASCOT for service users. The weights also provide insight into how Austrians value different LTC-QoL states. Future research may investigate how values for different LTC-QoL states differ between socioeconomic groups.

摘要

背景

成人社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)用于衡量长期护理(LTC)服务提供的生活质量(QoL)结果。计算ASCOT分数需要特定国家的偏好权重。ASCOT已被翻译成德语,但缺乏德语国家的偏好权重。

目的

本文旨在使用最佳 - 最差尺度法(BWS)为德语版的ASCOT服务使用者测量工具建立奥地利的偏好权重。

方法

通过在线BWS实验从奥地利成年人的普通人群样本(n = 1000)中收集数据。我们使用考虑定位效应的尺度调整多项logit模型(S - MNL)来估计偏好权重。

结果

奥地利人最看重ASCOT领域中“白天有意义地度过”和“对日常生活有掌控力”的顶级属性水平,而在“尊严”和“社会参与”领域中,高需求是最不受欢迎的。从方法角度来看,我们发现仅在“最佳”选择中有显著的定位效应,列表顶部的陈述比列表中靠后的陈述被选中的频率更高。与调查完成相关的因素(自我评估对任务的理解和调查完成时间)对个体选择一致性的影响最大。

讨论

本文为德语版ASCOT的服务使用者提供了奥地利的偏好权重。这些权重还深入了解了奥地利人如何评估不同的长期护理生活质量状态。未来的研究可以调查不同社会经济群体之间不同长期护理生活质量状态的价值观有何差异。

相似文献

1
Population-based preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) for service users for Austria: Findings from a best-worst experiment.奥地利成年社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)服务使用者基于人群的偏好权重:最佳-最差实验的结果
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Apr;250:112792. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112792. Epub 2020 Jan 7.
2
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
3
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.
4
Factors that influence participation in physical activity for people with bipolar disorder: a synthesis of qualitative evidence.影响双相障碍患者参与体育活动的因素:定性证据的综合分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 4;6(6):CD013557. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013557.pub2.
5
What's important when caring for a loved one? Population-based preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for informal carers (ASCOT-Carer) for Austria.照顾亲人时最重要的是什么?基于人群的奥地利非正式照护者成人社会关怀结局工具包(ASCOT-Carer)的偏好权重。
Qual Life Res. 2021 Jul;30(7):1975-1984. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02775-8. Epub 2021 Feb 17.
6
Unconditional cash transfers for reducing poverty and vulnerabilities: effect on use of health services and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries.无条件现金转移以减少贫困和脆弱性:对中低收入国家卫生服务利用和健康结果的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Mar 29;3(3):CD011135. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011135.pub3.
7
A New Measure of Quantified Social Health Is Associated With Levels of Discomfort, Capability, and Mental and General Health Among Patients Seeking Musculoskeletal Specialty Care.一种新的量化社会健康指标与寻求肌肉骨骼专科护理的患者的不适程度、能力以及心理和总体健康水平相关。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Apr 1;483(4):647-663. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003394. Epub 2025 Feb 5.
8
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
9
Understanding patient pathways to Mother and Baby Units: a longitudinal retrospective service evaluation in the UK.了解患者通往母婴病房的路径:英国一项纵向回顾性服务评估
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Jul 16:1-17. doi: 10.3310/GDVS2427.
10
Community and hospital-based healthcare professionals perceptions of digital advance care planning for palliative and end-of-life care: a latent class analysis.社区和医院的医疗保健专业人员对姑息治疗和临终关怀的数字预立医疗计划的看法:一项潜在类别分析。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Jun 25:1-22. doi: 10.3310/XCGE3294.

引用本文的文献

1
Use of the adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT) in research studies: an international scoping review.成人社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)在研究中的应用:一项国际范围综述
Qual Life Res. 2025 Apr 18. doi: 10.1007/s11136-025-03958-3.
2
Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH's capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?OxCAP-MH 能力项目的相对重要性是否因心理健康问题的经历而有所不同?
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022 Jun 24;20(1):99. doi: 10.1186/s12955-022-02009-6.
3
Supporting the involvement of older adults with complex needs in evaluation of outcomes in long-term care at home programmes.
支持有复杂需求的老年人参与家庭长期护理项目中结局评估。
Health Expect. 2022 Aug;25(4):1453-1463. doi: 10.1111/hex.13484. Epub 2022 Apr 19.
4
Valuing informal carers' quality of life using best-worst scaling-Finnish preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for carers (ASCOT-Carer).采用最佳最差标度法评估非正规护工的生活质量——针对护工的成人社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT-Carer)的芬兰偏好权重。
Eur J Health Econ. 2022 Apr;23(3):357-374. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01356-3. Epub 2021 Sep 1.
5
Do You Prefer Safety to Social Participation? Finnish Population-Based Preference Weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) for Service Users.相较于社会参与,你更看重安全吗?芬兰基于人群的成年服务使用者社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)偏好权重。
MDM Policy Pract. 2021 Jul 9;6(2):23814683211027902. doi: 10.1177/23814683211027902. eCollection 2021 Jul-Dec.
6
What's important when caring for a loved one? Population-based preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for informal carers (ASCOT-Carer) for Austria.照顾亲人时最重要的是什么?基于人群的奥地利非正式照护者成人社会关怀结局工具包(ASCOT-Carer)的偏好权重。
Qual Life Res. 2021 Jul;30(7):1975-1984. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02775-8. Epub 2021 Feb 17.
7
Cross-cultural adaptation and construct validity of the German version of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for service users (German ASCOT).成人社会关怀结果工具包(德国 ASCOT)使用者德语版的跨文化调适和结构效度。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Oct 6;18(1):326. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01533-7.