• 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

通过应用消费者研究领域的概念改善患者偏好诱导:叙事性文献综述

Improving Patient Preference Elicitation by Applying Concepts From the Consumer Research Field: Narrative Literature Review.

作者信息

Ver Donck Niki, Vander Stichele Geert, Huys Isabelle

机构信息

Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Health Economics Consultancy, ISMS, Turnhout, Belgium.

出版信息

Interact J Med Res. 2020 Mar 31;9(1):e13684. doi: 10.2196/13684.

DOI:10.2196/13684
PMID:32229460
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7157502/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although preference research finds its origins in consumer research, preference elicitation methods have increasingly attracted attention in different decision-making contexts in health care. Simulating real-life decision making is believed to be important during consumer preference elicitation.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to compare the process of decision making between patients and consumers and to identify methods from the consumer research field that could be applied in patient preference elicitation.

METHODS

A narrative literature review was performed to identify preference elicitation concepts from a consumer context that could offer improvements in health care.

RESULTS

The process of decision making between patients and consumers was highly comparable. The following five concepts from the consumer research field that could effectively simulate a real-life decision-making process for applications in health care were identified: simulating alternatives, self-reflection, feedback-driven exploration, separated (adaptive) dual response, and arranging profiles in blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to similarities in the decision-making process, patients could be considered as a subgroup of consumers, suggesting that preference elicitation concepts from the consumer field may be relevant in health care. Five concepts that help to simulate real-life decision making have the potential to improve patient preference elicitation. However, the extent to which real decision-making contexts can be mimicked in health care remains unknown.

摘要

背景

尽管偏好研究起源于消费者研究,但偏好诱导方法在医疗保健的不同决策背景中越来越受到关注。在消费者偏好诱导过程中,模拟现实生活中的决策被认为很重要。

目的

本研究旨在比较患者和消费者的决策过程,并确定消费者研究领域中可应用于患者偏好诱导的方法。

方法

进行了一项叙述性文献综述,以确定来自消费者背景的偏好诱导概念,这些概念可改善医疗保健。

结果

患者和消费者的决策过程具有高度可比性。确定了消费者研究领域中以下五个可有效模拟现实生活决策过程以应用于医疗保健的概念:模拟替代方案、自我反思、反馈驱动探索、分离(自适应)双反应以及分块排列简介。

结论

由于决策过程的相似性,患者可被视为消费者的一个子群体,这表明来自消费者领域的偏好诱导概念可能与医疗保健相关。有助于模拟现实生活决策的五个概念有可能改善患者偏好诱导。然而,在医疗保健中能够模拟真实决策背景的程度仍然未知。

相似文献

1
Improving Patient Preference Elicitation by Applying Concepts From the Consumer Research Field: Narrative Literature Review.通过应用消费者研究领域的概念改善患者偏好诱导:叙事性文献综述
Interact J Med Res. 2020 Mar 31;9(1):e13684. doi: 10.2196/13684.
2
Appraising patient preference methods for decision-making in the medical product lifecycle: an empirical comparison.评估医疗产品生命周期决策中患者偏好的方法:实证比较。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Jun 19;20(1):114. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01142-w.
3
Values elicitation among adults making health-related decisions: A concept analysis.成人在健康相关决策中的价值观探究:概念分析。
Nurs Forum. 2022 Sep;57(5):885-892. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12730. Epub 2022 Apr 17.
4
Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE): A New Preference-Elicitation Method for Decision Making in Healthcare.参与式价值评估(PVE):一种用于医疗保健决策的新型偏好诱导方法。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2024 Mar;22(2):145-154. doi: 10.1007/s40258-023-00859-9. Epub 2023 Dec 16.
5
Decision support for patients: values clarification and preference elicitation.为患者提供决策支持:价值观澄清和偏好 elicitation。
Med Care Res Rev. 2013 Feb;70(1 Suppl):50S-79S. doi: 10.1177/1077558712461182. Epub 2012 Nov 1.
6
Representing patient preference-related concepts for inclusion in electronic health records.呈现与患者偏好相关的概念以纳入电子健康记录。
J Biomed Inform. 2001 Dec;34(6):415-22. doi: 10.1006/jbin.2002.1035.
7
The Feasibility and Usability of a Ranking Tool to Elicit Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Trigger Finger.一种用于引出患者对扳机指治疗偏好的排序工具的可行性和可用性
J Hand Surg Am. 2019 Jun;44(6):480-486.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.01.005. Epub 2019 Feb 21.
8
Proposal for a Framework to Enable Elicitation of Preferences for Clients in Need of Long-Term Care.关于建立一个能够引出长期护理需求客户偏好的框架的提议。
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020 Aug 25;14:1553-1566. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S257501. eCollection 2020.
9
Quantifying benefit-risk preferences for medical interventions: an overview of a growing empirical literature.量化医疗干预措施的获益-风险偏好:日益增长的实证文献概述。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013 Aug;11(4):319-29. doi: 10.1007/s40258-013-0028-y.
10
What factors hinder the decision-making process for women with cancer and contemplating fertility preservation treatment?哪些因素会阻碍患有癌症并考虑进行生育力保存治疗的女性做出决策?
Hum Reprod Update. 2017 Jul 1;23(4):433-457. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmx009.

引用本文的文献

1
Patient preferences for gene therapy in haemophilia: Results from the PAVING threshold technique survey.血友病患者对基因治疗的偏好:PAVING阈值技术调查结果。
Haemophilia. 2021 Nov;27(6):957-966. doi: 10.1111/hae.14401. Epub 2021 Sep 1.

本文引用的文献

1
First and Foremost Battle the Virus: Eliciting Patient Preferences in Antiviral Therapy for Hepatitis C Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.首要任务:对抗病毒——利用离散选择实验了解丙型肝炎抗病毒治疗中的患者偏好
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):776-787. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.007.
2
A Framework for Incorporating Patient Preferences Regarding Benefits and Risks into Regulatory Assessment of Medical Technologies.将患者对益处和风险的偏好纳入医疗技术监管评估的框架。
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):746-750. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.02.019.
3
Patient Preferences in Regulatory Benefit-Risk Assessments: A US Perspective.监管效益-风险评估中的患者偏好:美国视角
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):741-745. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.008.
4
Patient-Focused Benefit-Risk Analysis to Inform Regulatory Decisions: The European Union Perspective.以患者为中心的获益-风险分析为监管决策提供信息:欧盟视角
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):734-740. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.006. Epub 2016 Sep 9.
5
Regulatory Decision Making in Canada-Exploring New Frontiers in Patient Involvement.加拿大的监管决策——探索患者参与的新领域
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):730-733. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.03.1855. Epub 2016 May 6.
6
Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force.离散选择实验分析的统计方法:药物经济学与结果研究国际协会联合分析良好研究实践特别工作组报告
Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):300-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. Epub 2016 May 12.
7
Experimental measurement of preferences in health care using best-worst scaling (BWS): theoretical and statistical issues.使用最佳-最差标度法(BWS)对医疗保健偏好进行的实验测量:理论和统计问题。
Health Econ Rev. 2016 Dec;6(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s13561-015-0077-z. Epub 2016 Jan 29.
8
Literature review of visual representation of the results of benefit-risk assessments of medicinal products.药品获益-风险评估结果的可视化呈现文献综述
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016 Mar;25(3):238-50. doi: 10.1002/pds.3880. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
9
Health literacy in Europe: comparative results of the European health literacy survey (HLS-EU).欧洲的健康素养:欧洲健康素养调查(HLS-EU)的比较结果。
Eur J Public Health. 2015 Dec;25(6):1053-8. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv043. Epub 2015 Apr 5.
10
Patient representatives' contributions to the benefit-risk assessment tasks of the European Medicines Agency scientific committees.患者代表对欧洲药品管理局科学委员会效益-风险评估任务的贡献。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Dec;78(6):1248-56. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12456.