• 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

不当卵巢癌筛查的动机:对女性及其临床医生的调查。

Motivators of Inappropriate Ovarian Cancer Screening: A Survey of Women and Their Clinicians.

机构信息

Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Department of General Practice, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020 Dec 8;5(1). doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa110. eCollection 2021 Feb.

DOI:10.1093/jncics/pkaa110
PMID:33554034
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7853181/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study examined why women and doctors screen for ovarian cancer (OC) contrary to guidelines.

METHODS

Surveys, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, were sent to women in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer and family physicians and gynecologists who organized their screening.

RESULTS

Of 1264 Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer women, 832 (65.8%) responded. In the past 2 years, 126 (15.1%) had screened. Most of these (n = 101, 80.2%) would continue even if their doctor told them it is ineffective. For women, key OC screening motivators operated in the domains of social role and goals (staying healthy for family, 93.9%), emotion and reinforcement (peace of mind, 93.1%), and beliefs about capabilities (tests are easy to have, 91.9%). Of 531 clinicians 252 (47.5%) responded; a minority (family physicians 45.8%, gynecologists 16.7%) thought OC screening was useful. For gynecologists, the main motivators of OC screening operated in the domains of environmental context (lack of other screening options, 27.6%), and emotion (patient peace of mind, 17.2%; difficulty discontinuing screening, 13.8%). For family physicians,, the strongest motivators were in the domains of social influence (women ask for these tests, 20.7%), goals (a chance these tests will detect cancer early, 16.4%), emotion (patient peace of mind, 13.8%), and environmental context (no other OC screening options, 11.2%).

CONCLUSION

Reasons for OC screening are mostly patient driven. Clinician knowledge and practice are discordant. Motivators of OC screening encompass several domains, which could be targeted in interventions to reduce inappropriate OC screening.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在探讨女性和医生为何违背指南对卵巢癌(OC)进行筛查。

方法

基于理论领域框架,向凯思琳·坎宁安家族乳腺癌研究联合会的女性成员以及组织其筛查的家庭医生和妇科医生发送了调查。

结果

在凯思琳·坎宁安家族乳腺癌研究联合会的 1264 名女性中,有 832 名(65.8%)做出了回应。在过去的 2 年中,有 126 名(15.1%)进行了筛查。其中大多数人(n=101,80.2%)即使医生告诉他们这种筛查无效也会继续进行。对于女性来说,OC 筛查的关键动机存在于社会角色和目标(为了家人保持健康,93.9%)、情感和强化(安心,93.1%)以及对能力的信念(检查很容易进行,91.9%)等领域。在 531 名临床医生中,有 252 名(47.5%)做出了回应;少数人(家庭医生 45.8%,妇科医生 16.7%)认为 OC 筛查有用。对于妇科医生来说,OC 筛查的主要动机存在于环境背景(缺乏其他筛查选择,27.6%)和情感(患者安心,17.2%;难以停止筛查,13.8%)等领域。对于家庭医生来说,最强的动机存在于社会影响(女性要求进行这些检查,20.7%)、目标(这些检查有机会早期发现癌症,16.4%)、情感(患者安心,13.8%)和环境背景(没有其他 OC 筛查选择,11.2%)等领域。

结论

OC 筛查的原因主要是患者驱动的。临床医生的知识和实践存在不一致。OC 筛查的动机涉及多个领域,这可能是减少不适当 OC 筛查的干预措施的目标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/bb98b4bafe33/pkaa110f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/cf4ae6141f3b/pkaa110f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/ee9a27d9f4a4/pkaa110f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/2efcf02cce2d/pkaa110f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/bb98b4bafe33/pkaa110f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/cf4ae6141f3b/pkaa110f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/ee9a27d9f4a4/pkaa110f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/2efcf02cce2d/pkaa110f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c049/7853181/bb98b4bafe33/pkaa110f4.jpg

相似文献

1
Motivators of Inappropriate Ovarian Cancer Screening: A Survey of Women and Their Clinicians.不当卵巢癌筛查的动机:对女性及其临床医生的调查。
JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020 Dec 8;5(1). doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa110. eCollection 2021 Feb.
2
Breast Cancer Chemoprevention: Use and Views of Australian Women and Their Clinicians.乳腺癌化学预防:澳大利亚女性及其临床医生的使用情况与观点
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2021 Jan;14(1):131-144. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-20-0369. Epub 2020 Oct 28.
3
Cancer risk management practices of noncarriers within BRCA1/2 mutation positive families in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer.凯瑟琳·坎宁安家族性乳腺癌研究基金会联盟中BRCA1/2基因突变阳性家族中非携带者的癌症风险管理实践
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jan 10;26(2):225-32. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.0262. Epub 2007 Nov 26.
4
Analysis of cancer risk and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation prevalence in the kConFab familial breast cancer resource.kConFab家族性乳腺癌资源中癌症风险及BRCA1和BRCA2突变患病率分析
Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8(1):R12. doi: 10.1186/bcr1377. Epub 2006 Feb 13.
5
Guideline-inconsistent breast cancer screening for women over 50: a vignette-based survey.50岁以上女性不符合指南的乳腺癌筛查:一项基于病例 vignette 的调查
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Jan;29(1):82-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2567-1. Epub 2013 Aug 14.
6
Awareness of ovarian cancer risk factors, beliefs and attitudes towards screening: baseline survey of 21,715 women participating in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening.卵巢癌风险因素认知、筛查相关信念和态度:英国卵巢癌筛查协作试验 21715 名参与女性的基线调查。
Br J Cancer. 2010 Aug 10;103(4):454-61. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605809. Epub 2010 Jul 20.
7
Ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: The impact of mutation position and family history on the cancer risk.携带BRCA1/2基因突变者的卵巢癌:突变位置和家族史对癌症风险的影响。
Maturitas. 2015 Oct;82(2):197-202. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.07.001. Epub 2015 Jul 9.
8
Current perspectives on BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast cancers.BRCA1和BRCA2相关乳腺癌的当前观点
Intern Med J. 2001 Aug;31(6):349-56. doi: 10.1046/j.1445-5994.2001.00075.x.
9
Selecting Patients with Ovarian Cancer for Germline BRCA Mutation Testing: Findings from Guidelines and a Systematic Literature Review.选择卵巢癌患者进行胚系BRCA突变检测:指南及系统文献综述的结果
Adv Ther. 2016 Feb;33(2):129-50. doi: 10.1007/s12325-016-0281-1. Epub 2016 Jan 25.
10
Vignette-based study of ovarian cancer screening: do U.S. physicians report adhering to evidence-based recommendations?基于病例的卵巢癌筛查研究:美国医生是否报告遵循基于证据的建议?
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Feb 7;156(3):182-94. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-3-201202070-00006.

引用本文的文献

1
Using theories and frameworks to understand how to reduce low-value healthcare: a scoping review.利用理论和框架来理解如何减少低价值的医疗保健:范围综述。
Implement Sci. 2022 Jan 20;17(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01177-1.
2
Peace of Mind: A Role in Unnecessary Care?安心:在不必要的医疗中扮演的角色?
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Feb 10;40(5):433-437. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.01895. Epub 2021 Dec 9.
3
The Influence of Emotions on Treatment Decisions About Low-Risk Thyroid Cancer: A Qualitative Study.情绪对低危甲状腺癌治疗决策的影响:一项定性研究。

本文引用的文献

1
Education as a low-value improvement intervention: often necessary but rarely sufficient.教育作为一种低价值的改进干预措施:通常是必要的,但很少是充分的。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2020 May;29(5):353-357. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010411. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
2
Do you recommend cancer screening to your patients? A cross-sectional study of Norwegian doctors.你是否向你的患者推荐癌症筛查?一项对挪威医生的横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 30;9(8):e029739. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029739.
3
Effectiveness and safety of electronically delivered prescribing feedback and decision support on antibiotic use for respiratory illness in primary care: REDUCE cluster randomised trial.
Thyroid. 2021 Dec;31(12):1800-1807. doi: 10.1089/thy.2021.0323. Epub 2021 Nov 26.
电子传递处方反馈和决策支持对初级保健中呼吸道疾病抗生素使用的有效性和安全性:RE- DUCE 集群随机试验。
BMJ. 2019 Feb 12;364:l236. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l236.
4
US gynecologists' estimates and beliefs regarding ovarian cancer screening's effectiveness 5 years after release of the PLCO evidence.美国妇科医生在发布 PLCO 证据 5 年后对卵巢癌筛查效果的估计和看法。
Sci Rep. 2018 Nov 21;8(1):17181. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-35585-z.
5
Physician Nonprofessional Cancer Experience and Ovarian Cancer Screening Practices: Results from a National Survey of Primary Care Physicians.非专业医师的癌症经验与卵巢癌筛查实践:来自初级保健医师全国性调查的结果。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2018 Nov;27(11):1335-1341. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2018.6947. Epub 2018 Aug 10.
6
Interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections: summary and update of a systematic review.减少急性呼吸道感染抗生素不适当处方的干预措施:系统评价的总结与更新
J Int Med Res. 2018 Aug;46(8):3337-3357. doi: 10.1177/0300060518782519. Epub 2018 Jul 1.
7
Screening for Ovarian Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.卵巢癌筛查:美国预防服务工作组推荐声明。
JAMA. 2018 Feb 13;319(6):588-594. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21926.
8
A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems.运用行为改变理论领域框架调查实施问题指南。
Implement Sci. 2017 Jun 21;12(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9.
9
Risks of Breast, Ovarian, and Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers.BRCA1 和 BRCA2 基因突变携带者的乳腺癌、卵巢癌和对侧乳腺癌风险。
JAMA. 2017 Jun 20;317(23):2402-2416. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.7112.
10
Early Detection of Ovarian Cancer using the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm with Frequent CA125 Testing in Women at Increased Familial Risk - Combined Results from Two Screening Trials.应用卵巢癌风险算法和频繁 CA125 检测对家族性卵巢癌风险升高的女性进行卵巢癌早期检测:两项筛查试验的联合结果。
Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Jul 15;23(14):3628-3637. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2750. Epub 2017 Jan 31.