• 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
A discrete choice experiment to identify the most efficient quality indicators for the supervision of psychiatric hospitals.一项识别最有效的精神病院监管质量指标的离散选择实验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 12;20(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4993-1.
2
The development of quality indicators in mental healthcare: a discrete choice experiment.精神卫生保健质量指标的制定:离散选择实验。
BMC Psychiatry. 2012 Aug 7;12:103. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-12-103.
3
Investigating the Potential Contribution of Patient Rating Sites to Hospital Supervision: Exploratory Results From an Interview Study in the Netherlands.探究患者评价网站对医院监管的潜在贡献:荷兰一项访谈研究的探索性结果
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jul 20;18(7):e201. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5552.
4
[Sharing internal audit results with the Inspectorate; interviews on the possibility and preconditions].[与监察局分享内部审计结果;就可能性和前提条件进行访谈]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2018 Apr 30;162:D2517.
5
Developing medical record-based, healthcare quality indicators for psychiatric hospitals in China: a modified Delphi-Analytic Hierarchy Process study.开发中国精神科医院基于病历的医疗质量指标:改良德尔菲-层次分析法研究。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2019 Dec 31;31(10):733-740. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzz005.
6
[The development of a core set of quality of care indicators in a psychiatric hospital].[一家精神病医院护理质量指标核心集的制定]
Sante Publique. 2003 Mar;15(1):99-113.
7
On selecting quality indicators: preferences of patients with breast and colon cancers regarding hospital quality indicators.选择质量指标:乳腺癌和结肠癌患者对医院质量指标的偏好。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2020 Jul;29(7):576-585. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009818. Epub 2019 Dec 12.
8
Quality indicators for all dimensions of infertility care quality: consensus between professionals and patients.不孕不育护理质量所有维度的质量指标:专业人员与患者之间的共识。
Hum Reprod. 2013 Jun;28(6):1584-97. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det056. Epub 2013 Mar 18.
9
First Dutch Consensus of Pain Quality Indicators for Pain Treatment Facilities.荷兰疼痛治疗机构疼痛质量指标的首个共识。
Pain Pract. 2016 Jan;16(1):57-66. doi: 10.1111/papr.12331. Epub 2015 Jul 22.
10
Are performance indicators used for hospital quality management: a qualitative interview study amongst health professionals and quality managers in The Netherlands.绩效指标是否用于医院质量管理:荷兰卫生专业人员和质量管理人员的定性访谈研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Oct 13;16(1):574. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1826-3.

引用本文的文献

1
The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.健康经济学中离散选择实验的发展态势:一项系统综述
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 May 21. doi: 10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y.

本文引用的文献

1
The development of quality indicators in mental healthcare: a discrete choice experiment.精神卫生保健质量指标的制定:离散选择实验。
BMC Psychiatry. 2012 Aug 7;12:103. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-12-103.
2
Classifying indicators of quality: a collaboration between Dutch and English regulators.分类质量指标:荷兰和英国监管机构的合作。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2011 Dec;23(6):637-44. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr055. Epub 2011 Aug 16.
3
Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations.运用定性方法进行离散选择实验的属性开发:问题与建议。
Health Econ. 2012 Jun;21(6):730-41. doi: 10.1002/hec.1739. Epub 2011 May 6.
4
Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide.开展离散选择实验以辅助医疗保健决策:用户指南
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(8):661-77. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004.
5
Quality indicators for international benchmarking of mental health care.精神卫生保健国际基准化的质量指标。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2006 Sep;18 Suppl 1:31-8. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzl025.

一项识别最有效的精神病院监管质量指标的离散选择实验。

A discrete choice experiment to identify the most efficient quality indicators for the supervision of psychiatric hospitals.

机构信息

Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate, Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport, Stadsplateau 1, 3521 AZ, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 12;20(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4993-1.

DOI:10.1186/s12913-020-4993-1
PMID:32164709
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7069034/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the Netherlands, health care is regulated by the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate. Forty-six indicators are used to prioritize supervision of psychiatric hospitals. The objective of this study is to define a smaller set of weighted indicators which reflects a consensus among inspectors about which aspects are most important for risk assessment.

METHODS

The set of 46 indicators, complemented with missing information, was reduced to six indicators by means of interviews, group discussions and ranking among the inspectors. These indicators were used as attributes in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to define their weights.

RESULTS

Twenty-six inspectors defined the top four indicators suitable for the risk assessment of psychiatric hospitals. These are: the policy on prevention of compulsory treatment; the policy on dysfunctional professionals; the quality of internal research after a serious incident; and the implementation of multidisciplinary guidelines on suicidal behaviour. These indicators share the same importance with regard to risk assessment. The screening of somatic symptoms and the policy on integrated care are important indicators too, but less relevant.

CONCLUSION

Through a DCE, we reduced the amount of information for risk assessment of psychiatric hospitals to six weighted indicators. Inspectors can use these indicators to prioritize their inspections.

摘要

背景

在荷兰,医疗保健由卫生和青年保健监察局监管。使用 46 项指标对精神病院进行监督。本研究的目的是定义一组较小的加权指标,反映出监察员对哪些方面对风险评估最重要的共识。

方法

通过访谈、小组讨论和监察员排名,将 46 项指标(辅以缺失信息)减少到 6 项指标。这些指标被用作离散选择实验(DCE)的属性,以确定它们的权重。

结果

26 名监察员确定了适合精神病院风险评估的前四个指标。这些指标是:预防强制治疗的政策;功能失调专业人员的政策;严重事件后内部研究的质量;以及实施自杀行为的多学科指南。这些指标在风险评估方面具有同等重要性。躯体症状的筛查和综合护理政策也是重要的指标,但相关性较低。

结论

通过离散选择实验,我们将精神病院风险评估的信息量减少到六个加权指标。监察员可以使用这些指标来优先安排他们的检查。