Medicine Service Line, Redcliffe Hospital, Redcliffe, Queensland, Australia
Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2022 Jul 22;12(7):e063061. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063061.
(1) Identify the healthcare settings in which goal attainment scaling (GAS) has been used as an outcome measure in randomised controlled trials. (2) Describe how GAS has been implemented by researchers in those trials.
Scoping review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews approach.
PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched through 28 February 2022.
English-language publications reporting on research where adults in healthcare settings were recruited to a randomised controlled trial where GAS was an outcome measure.
Two independent reviewers completed data extraction. Data collected underwent descriptive statistics.
Of 1,838 articles screened, 38 studies were included. These studies were most frequently conducted in rehabilitation (58%) and geriatric medicine (24%) disciplines/populations. Sample sizes ranged from 8 to 468, with a median of 51 participants (IQR: 30-96). A number of studies did not report on implementation aspects such as the personnel involved (26%), the training provided (79%) and the calibration and review mechanisms (87%). Not all trials used the same scale, with 24% varying from the traditional five-point scale. Outcome attainment was scored in various manners (self-report: 21%; observed: 26%; both self-report and observed: 8%; and not reported: 45%), and the calculation of GAS scores differed between trials (raw score: 21%; T score: 47%; other: 21%; and not reported: 66%).
GAS has been used as an outcome measure across a wide range of disciplines and trial settings. However, there are inadequacies and inconsistencies in how it has been applied and implemented. Developing a cross-disciplinary practical guide to support a degree of standardisation in its implementation may be beneficial in increasing the reliability and comparability of trial results.
CRD42021237541.
（1）确定目标达成评分（GAS）作为随机对照试验的结局指标在哪些医疗保健环境中使用。（2）描述研究人员在这些试验中如何实施 GAS。
使用系统评价和荟萃分析扩展的首选报告项目进行范围综述的范围审查方法。
通过 2022 年 2 月 28 日检索 PubMed、CENTRAL、EMBASE 和 PsycINFO。
英语发表的报告，研究对象为医疗保健环境中的成年人，纳入随机对照试验，其中 GAS 为结局指标。
两名独立审查员完成数据提取。收集的数据进行了描述性统计。
在筛选出的 1838 篇文章中，有 38 项研究被纳入。这些研究最常在康复（58%）和老年医学（24%）领域/人群中进行。样本量从 8 到 468 不等，中位数为 51 名参与者（IQR：30-96）。一些研究没有报告实施方面的情况，如参与人员（26%）、提供的培训（79%）以及校准和审查机制（87%）。并非所有试验都使用相同的量表，有 24%的试验偏离了传统的五分制量表。结局达成以各种方式评分（自我报告：21%；观察：26%；自我报告和观察：8%；未报告：45%），且试验之间 GAS 评分的计算方式不同（原始评分：21%；T 评分：47%；其他：21%；未报告：66%）。
GAS 已作为一种结局指标在广泛的学科和试验环境中使用。然而，在其应用和实施方面存在不足和不一致。制定跨学科实用指南以支持其实施的一定程度的标准化，可能有助于提高试验结果的可靠性和可比性。
PROSPERO 注册号：CRD42021237541。
