Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark and Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, J. B. Winsløws Vej 9 a, 3. floor, DK-5000, Odense C, Denmark.
MGH Division of General Internal Medicine & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Sep 10;20(1):851. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05717-1.
Obtaining a sample that is representative of the group of interest is of utmost importance in questionnaire studies. In a survey using a state authorized web-portal for citizen communication with authorities, we wanted to investigate the view of adult men on patient involvement in health care decision-making regarding Prostate-Specific Antigen test for prostatic cancer. In this paper, we report on sample characteristics and representativeness of our sample in terms of personality and baseline involvement preferences.
We compared personality profiles (BFI-10) and baseline healthcare decision-making preferences (CPS) in our sample (n = 6756) to internationally available datasets. Pooled data from a) US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (n = 1512), b) Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Belgium (n = 1136), and c) Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark (n = 1313) were used for BFI-10 comparisons. Regarding CPS, we compared our sample with three previous datasets relating to decision-making in cancer (n = 425, 387, and 199).
Although statistically significant differences particularly appeared in large dataset comparisons, sample BFI-10 and CPS profiles mostly were within the range of those previously reported. Similarity was greatest in BFI-10 comparisons with group a) where no statistically significant difference could be established in factors 'agreeableness' and 'neuroticism' (p = .095 and .578, respectively).
Despite some variation, our sample displays personality and baseline preference profiles that are generally similar to those described in previous international studies. For example, this was the case with the BFI-10 'agreeableness' measure (incl. trust and fault-finding items), an important factor in healthcare decision-making.
在问卷调查研究中，获得具有代表性的样本至关重要。在一项使用国家授权的公民与当局沟通网络门户进行的调查中，我们希望调查成年男性对前列腺癌 PSA 检测中患者参与医疗决策的看法。本文报告了我们样本的特征和代表性，包括人格和基线参与偏好。
我们比较了我们的样本（n=6756）的人格特征（BFI-10）和基线医疗决策偏好（CPS）与国际上可用的数据集。使用来自 a）美国、英国、加拿大、澳大利亚和新西兰（n=1512）、b）德国、荷兰、瑞士和比利时（n=1136）和 c）挪威、瑞典、芬兰和丹麦（n=1313）的 pooled 数据进行 BFI-10 比较。关于 CPS，我们将我们的样本与三个以前关于癌症决策的数据集进行了比较（n=425、387 和 199）。
尽管在大型数据集比较中出现了统计学上的显著差异，但样本的 BFI-10 和 CPS 特征大多在以前报告的范围内。在与组 a）的 BFI-10 比较中，相似性最大，其中“宜人性”和“神经质”这两个因素没有统计学上的显著差异（p=0.095 和.578，分别）。
尽管存在一些差异，但我们的样本显示出的人格和基线偏好特征与以前的国际研究中描述的大致相似。例如，BFI-10 的“宜人性”测量（包括信任和挑剔项目）就是这种情况，这是医疗决策中的一个重要因素。
