• 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 Systematic Review of Shared Decision-Making Interventions for Service Users With Serious Mental Illnesses: State of the Science and Future Directions.一项针对有严重精神疾病的服务使用者的共享决策干预措施的系统评价:科学现状和未来方向。
Psychiatr Serv. 2021 Nov 1;72(11):1288-1300. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.202000429. Epub 2021 Aug 9.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.心理健康问题患者的共同决策干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.
4
Shared decision-making for people with asthma.哮喘患者的共同决策
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 3;10(10):CD012330. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012330.pub2.
5
Trends, challenges, and priorities for shared decision making in mental health: The first umbrella review.精神健康领域共享决策的趋势、挑战和优先事项:首项伞式综述。
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2023 Jun;69(4):823-840. doi: 10.1177/00207640221140291. Epub 2023 Jan 20.
6
Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening.支持女性进行乳腺癌筛查决策的共享决策。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 10;5(5):CD013822. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013822.pub2.
7
A meta-ethnography of shared decision-making in mental health care from the perspective of staff and service users.从工作人员和服务使用者的角度对精神卫生保健中的共同决策进行的元民族志研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Sep 27;24(1):1142. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11540-9.
8
Perceptions of shared decision-making in severe mental illness: An integrative review.严重精神疾病中共享决策的认知:综合评价。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Apr;27(2):103-127. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12558. Epub 2019 Dec 6.
9
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性:一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
10
Interventions for promoting participation in shared decision-making for children with cancer.促进癌症患儿参与共同决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6(6):CD008970. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008970.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Bipolar Early Intervention Using New Digital Technologies (BLEND): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of a Novel Blended-Digital Early Intervention Model of Care for Youth With Bipolar Disorder I or II.使用新数字技术的双相情感障碍早期干预(BLEND):针对患有I型或II型双相情感障碍青少年的新型混合数字早期干预护理模式的试点随机对照试验
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2025 Jun;19(6):e70060. doi: 10.1111/eip.70060.
2
From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living with Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review.从理想主义者到现实主义者——为精神病患者抗精神病药物处方选择设计并实施共享决策干预措施(SHAPE):一项现实主义综述
Schizophr Bull. 2025 Jul 7;51(4):916-932. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbaf058.
3
From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living With Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review (Part 2-Designing SDM Interventions: Optimizing Design and Local Implementation).从理想主义者到现实主义者——为精神病患者抗精神病药物处方选择设计并实施共享决策干预措施(SHAPE):一项现实主义综述(第2部分——设计共享决策干预措施:优化设计与本地实施)
Schizophr Bull. 2025 Jul 7;51(4):932-948. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbaf059.
4
Family Members' Perspectives on Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine in Cancer Care.家庭成员对中西医结合癌症护理的看法。
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2025 Apr 28;18:2361-2373. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S509065. eCollection 2025.
5
Intensive Outreach for Mental Health: Young People's Experiences of an Intensive Outreach Model on Recovery and Engagement.心理健康强化外展服务:年轻人对强化外展模式在康复与参与方面的体验
Community Ment Health J. 2025 May;61(4):693-703. doi: 10.1007/s10597-024-01387-z. Epub 2025 Jan 6.
6
Case Study Analysis of a Decision Coaching Intervention for Young Adults with Early Psychosis.针对早期精神病青年成人的决策辅导干预案例研究分析
Community Ment Health J. 2025 Jan 3. doi: 10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w.
7
User and staff experiences of a revised process for coordinating support with shared decision making in the comorbidity field of practice: a qualitative interview study.在共病实践领域中,用户和工作人员对通过共享决策来协调支持的修订流程的体验:一项定性访谈研究。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2025 Dec;20(1):2447095. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2024.2447095. Epub 2024 Dec 26.
8
The Role of Shared Decision-Making in Promoting Family Participation in Treatment for Adolescents and Young Adults with First-Episode Psychosis.共同决策在促进家庭参与首发精神病青少年和青年治疗中的作用
Community Ment Health J. 2025 Feb;61(2):365-371. doi: 10.1007/s10597-024-01363-7. Epub 2024 Dec 7.
9
Pharmaceuticalization and Care Coordination in New York City Outpatient Mental Health.医药化与纽约市门诊精神健康中的照护协调。
Med Anthropol. 2024 Jul 3;43(5):383-396. doi: 10.1080/01459740.2024.2378092. Epub 2024 Jul 22.
10
A realist review of medication optimisation of community dwelling service users with serious mental illness.对患有严重精神疾病的社区居住服务使用者药物优化的现实主义综述。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2024 Dec 13;34(1):40-52. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016615.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical Decision Making: Communicating Risk and Engaging Patients in Shared Decision Making.临床决策:沟通风险并让患者参与共同决策。
Ann Intern Med. 2020 May 19;172(10):688-692. doi: 10.7326/M19-3495. Epub 2020 Apr 21.
2
Better care for less money: cost-effectiveness of integrated care in multi-episode patients with severe psychosis.以更少的钱获得更好的护理:多发作严重精神病患者综合护理的成本效益。
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2020 Mar;141(3):221-230. doi: 10.1111/acps.13139. Epub 2020 Jan 12.
3
Clients' experiences of shared decision making in an integrative psychotherapy for depression.客户在抑郁症综合心理治疗中共同决策的体验。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Apr;26(2):559-568. doi: 10.1111/jep.13320. Epub 2019 Dec 1.
4
Culturally adapted depression education and engagement in treatment among Hispanics in primary care: outcomes from a pilot feasibility study.文化适应的抑郁教育和参与初级保健中的西班牙裔人群的治疗:一项试点可行性研究的结果。
BMC Fam Pract. 2019 Oct 21;20(1):140. doi: 10.1186/s12875-019-1031-7.
5
Seven-day shared decision making for outpatients with first episode of mood disorders among university students: A randomized controlled trial.大学生首发心境障碍患者 7 天共决治疗:一项随机对照试验
Psychiatry Res. 2019 Nov;281:112531. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112531. Epub 2019 Aug 30.
6
Giving Patients Choices During Involuntary Admission: A New Intervention.在非自愿入院期间给予患者选择权:一项新干预措施。
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Jul 4;10:433. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00433. eCollection 2019.
7
Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses: a systematic review.促进慢性病共同决策要素的决策辅助工具:系统评价。
Syst Rev. 2019 May 20;8(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4.
8
Effectiveness of Shared Decision-Making for Elderly Depressed Minority Primary Care Patients.共同决策对老年抑郁少数族裔初级保健患者的有效性。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2019 Aug;27(8):883-893. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2019.02.016. Epub 2019 Mar 1.
9
Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE*D): the development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care.抑郁症患者的医疗保健选择(HOPE*D):一种用于初级保健的基于诊疗的决策辅助工具的开发与试点测试
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 8;9(4):e025375. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025375.
10
Physical health outcomes and implementation of behavioural health homes: a comprehensive review.身体健康结果和行为健康之家的实施:全面回顾。
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2018 Dec;30(6):224-241. doi: 10.1080/09540261.2018.1555153. Epub 2019 Mar 1.

一项针对有严重精神疾病的服务使用者的共享决策干预措施的系统评价:科学现状和未来方向。

A Systematic Review of Shared Decision-Making Interventions for Service Users With Serious Mental Illnesses: State of the Science and Future Directions.

机构信息

Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia (Thomas, Salzer, Zisman-Ilani); Department of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Okanagan (Ben-David); Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Desert Pacific, San Diego (Treichler); Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (Treichler); Ginsburg Health Sciences Library, Temple University, Philadelphia (Roth); Division of Behavioral Health Services and Policies, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York City (Dixon). Editor Emeritus Howard H. Goldman, M.D., Ph.D., served as decision editor on the manuscript.

出版信息

Psychiatr Serv. 2021 Nov 1;72(11):1288-1300. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.202000429. Epub 2021 Aug 9.

DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.202000429
PMID:34369801
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8570969/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model that may be particularly appealing to service users with serious mental illnesses, who often want to be involved in making decisions about their mental health care. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe and evaluate participant, intervention, methodological, and outcome characteristics of SDM intervention studies conducted within this population.

METHODS

Systematic searches of the literature through April 2020 were conducted and supplemented by hand searching of reference lists of identified studies. A total of 53 independent studies of SDM interventions that were conducted with service users with serious mental illnesses and that included a quantitative or qualitative measure of the intervention were included in the review. Data were independently extracted by at least two authors.

RESULTS

Most studies were conducted with middle-age, male, White individuals from Western countries. Interventions fell into the following categories: decision support tools only, multicomponent interventions involving decision support tools, multicomponent interventions not involving decision support tools, and shared care planning and preference elicitation interventions. Most studies were randomized controlled trials with sufficient sample sizes. Outcomes assessed were diverse, spanning decision-making constructs, clinical and functional, treatment engagement or adherence, and other constructs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest important future directions for research, including the need to evaluate the impact of SDM in special populations (e.g., young adults and racial-ethnic minority groups); to expand interventions to a broader array of decisions, users, and contexts; and to establish consensus measures to assess intervention effectiveness.

摘要

目的

共同决策(SDM)是一种健康沟通模式,可能特别吸引有严重精神疾病的服务使用者,他们通常希望参与做出与精神健康护理相关的决策。本系统综述的目的是描述和评估在该人群中进行的 SDM 干预研究的参与者、干预措施、方法学和结果特征。

方法

通过系统搜索文献,截至 2020 年 4 月,并通过手工搜索已确定研究的参考文献进行补充。本综述共纳入了 53 项关于 SDM 干预措施的独立研究,这些研究是针对有严重精神疾病的服务使用者进行的,并包括对干预措施的定量或定性测量。数据由至少两名作者独立提取。

结果

大多数研究都是针对来自西方国家的中年、男性、白人进行的。干预措施分为以下几类:仅决策支持工具、包含决策支持工具的多组分干预措施、不包含决策支持工具的多组分干预措施以及共同护理计划和偏好挖掘干预措施。大多数研究都是随机对照试验,样本量充足。评估的结果多种多样,涵盖决策制定结构、临床和功能、治疗参与或依从性以及其他结构。

结论

研究结果表明,未来的研究方向非常重要,包括需要评估 SDM 在特殊人群(如年轻人和少数族裔群体)中的影响;将干预措施扩展到更广泛的决策、使用者和情境;并建立共识措施来评估干预效果。