Suppr超能文献

一般实践研究中的选择偏差:丹麦孕妇队列分析。

Selection bias in general practice research: analysis in a cohort of pregnant Danish women.

机构信息

The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen , Denmark.

Centre for Rural Health, University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen , Scotland.

出版信息

Scand J Prim Health Care. 2020 Dec;38(4):464-472. doi: 10.1080/02813432.2020.1847827. Epub 2020 Nov 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to examine selection in a general practice-based pregnancy cohort.

DESIGN

Survey linked to administrative register data.

SETTING AND SUBJECTS

In spring 2015, GPs were recruited from two Danish regions. They were asked to invite all pregnant women in their practice who had their first prenatal care visit before 15 August 2016 to participate in the survey.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The characteristics of GPs and the pregnant women were compared at each step in the recruitment process - the GP's invitation, their agreement to participate, actual GP participation, and the women's participation - with an uncertainty coefficient to quantify the step where the largest selection occurs.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found between participating and non-participating practices with regards to practice characteristics such as the number of patients registered with the practice, the age and sex of doctors, and the type of practice. Despite these differences, the characteristics of the eligible patients differed little between participating and non-participating practices. In participating practices significant differences were, however, observed between recruited and non-recruited patients.

CONCLUSION

The skewed selection of patients was mainly caused by a high number of non-participants within practices that actively took part in the study. We recommend that a focus on the sampling within participating practices be the most important factor in representative sampling of patient populations in general practice. Key points Selection among general practitioners (GPs) is often unavoidable in practice-based studies, and we found significant differences between participating and non-participating practices. These include practice characteristics such as the number of GPs, the number of patients registered with the GP practice, as well as the sex and age of the GPs. •Despite this, only small differences in the characteristics of the eligible patients were observed between participating and non-participating practices. •In participating practices, however, significant differences were observed between recruited and non-recruited patients. •Comprehensive sampling within participating practices may be the best way to generate representative samples of patients.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在考察普通实践为基础的妊娠队列中的选择。

设计

调查与行政登记数据相关联。

设置和对象

2015 年春季,从丹麦两个地区招募全科医生。他们被要求邀请所有在 2016 年 8 月 15 日前在他们的实践中进行第一次产前护理就诊的孕妇参加调查。

结果测量

在招聘过程的每一步,即全科医生的邀请、他们同意参与、实际的全科医生参与以及妇女的参与,比较了全科医生和孕妇的特征,并使用不确定性系数来量化发生最大选择的步骤。

结果

在实践特征方面,如登记患者的数量、医生的年龄和性别以及实践类型,参与和不参与的实践之间存在显著差异。尽管存在这些差异,但符合条件的患者的特征在参与和不参与的实践之间差异很小。然而,在参与实践中,在招募和非招募患者之间观察到显著差异。

结论

患者的选择偏向主要是由于在积极参与研究的实践中,大量的非参与者造成的。我们建议,在一般实践中,患者人群代表性抽样的最重要因素是关注参与实践中的抽样。

关键点

在基于实践的研究中,全科医生(GP)的选择往往是不可避免的,我们发现参与和不参与的实践之间存在显著差异。这些差异包括实践特征,如全科医生的数量、GP 实践登记的患者数量,以及全科医生的性别和年龄。尽管如此,在参与和不参与的实践中,符合条件的患者的特征只有很小的差异。然而,在参与的实践中,在招募和非招募的患者之间观察到显著的差异。在参与的实践中,全面的抽样可能是生成患者代表性样本的最佳方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/57cb/7782229/b6fda8c5aeb4/IPRI_A_1847827_F0001_C.jpg

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