• 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

一项将健康保险决策干预措施从试验转化为常规癌症护理的案例研究。

A case study of adapting a health insurance decision intervention from trial into routine cancer care.

机构信息

Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, Campus, Box 8100, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, USA.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2022 Sep 10;15(1):298. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06189-8.

DOI:10.1186/s13104-022-06189-8
PMID:36088371
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9463661/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study adapted Improving Cancer Patients' Insurance Choices (I Can PIC), an intervention to help cancer patients navigate health insurance decisions and care costs. The original intervention improved knowledge and confidence making insurance decisions, however, users felt limited by choices provided in insurance markets. Using decision trees and frameworks to guide adaptations, we modified I Can PIC to focus on using rather than choosing health insurance. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced unforeseen obstacles, prompting changes to study protocols. As a result, we allowed users outside of the study to use I Can PIC (> 1050 guest users) to optimize public benefit. This paper describes the steps took to conduct the study, evaluating both the effectiveness of I Can PIC and the implementation process to improve its impact.

RESULTS

Although I Can PIC users had higher knowledge and health insurance literacy compared to the control group, results were not statistically significant. This outcome may be associated with systems-level challenges as well as the number and demographic characteristics of participants. The publicly available tool can be a resource for those navigating insurance and care costs, and researchers can use this flexible approach to intervention delivery and testing as future health emergencies arise.

摘要

目的

本研究改编了《改善癌症患者保险选择》(I Can PIC),这是一项旨在帮助癌症患者做出医疗保险决策和医疗费用决策的干预措施。原始干预措施提高了患者在保险决策方面的知识和信心,但用户感到受到保险市场提供的选择的限制。本研究使用决策树和框架来指导改编,将 I Can PIC 进行修改,重点放在使用而不是选择医疗保险上。COVID-19 大流行带来了意想不到的障碍,促使研究方案发生变化。因此,我们允许研究之外的用户使用 I Can PIC(超过 1050 位访客用户)来优化公共利益。本文描述了进行研究的步骤,评估了 I Can PIC 的有效性及其实施过程,以提高其影响力。

结果

尽管 I Can PIC 用户的知识和健康保险素养高于对照组,但结果无统计学意义。这一结果可能与系统层面的挑战以及参与者的数量和人口统计学特征有关。这款公开可用的工具可以为那些正在寻找保险和医疗费用的人提供资源,研究人员可以在未来出现健康紧急情况时,使用这种灵活的干预措施交付和测试方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fe7b/9463781/49bd7737ca94/13104_2022_6189_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fe7b/9463781/49bd7737ca94/13104_2022_6189_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fe7b/9463781/49bd7737ca94/13104_2022_6189_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
A case study of adapting a health insurance decision intervention from trial into routine cancer care.一项将健康保险决策干预措施从试验转化为常规癌症护理的案例研究。
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Sep 10;15(1):298. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06189-8.
2
Improving Cancer Patients' Insurance Choices (I Can PIC): A Randomized Trial of a Personalized Health Insurance Decision Aid.改善癌症患者的保险选择(I Can PIC):个性化健康保险决策辅助工具的随机试验。
Oncologist. 2020 Jul;25(7):609-619. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0703. Epub 2020 Feb 28.
3
Dissemination of a Web-Based Tool for Supporting Health Insurance Plan Decisions (Show Me Health Plans): Cross-Sectional Observational Study.用于支持健康保险计划决策的基于网络的工具(向我展示健康计划)的传播:横断面观察性研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jun 20;20(6):e209. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9829.
4
The effectiveness of health literacy interventions on the informed consent process of health care users: a systematic review protocol.健康素养干预措施对医疗保健使用者知情同意过程的有效性:一项系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):82-94. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2304.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
6
The use of evidence to guide decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: divergent perspectives from a qualitative case study in British Columbia, Canada.利用证据在 COVID-19 大流行期间指导决策:来自加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的定性案例研究的不同观点。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Jun 3;22(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01146-2.
7
A Randomized Trial Examining Three Strategies for Supporting Health Insurance Decisions among the Uninsured.一项针对三种帮助未参保者做出医疗保险决策策略的随机试验。
Med Decis Making. 2016 Oct;36(7):911-22. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15578635. Epub 2015 Apr 3.
8
Interventions to support the resilience and mental health of frontline health and social care professionals during and after a disease outbreak, epidemic or pandemic: a mixed methods systematic review.在疾病爆发、流行或大流行期间及之后,为支持一线卫生和社会护理专业人员的适应能力和心理健康所采取的干预措施:一项混合方法的系统评价
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Nov 5;11(11):CD013779. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013779.
9
Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage.瑞士 CHAT 研究:公民讨论瑞士医疗保险覆盖的优先事项。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Aug 1;7(8):746-754. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15.
10
User Interactions With Health Insurance Decision Aids: User Study With Retrospective Think-Aloud Interviews.用户与健康保险决策辅助工具的交互:采用回顾性出声思考访谈的用户研究
JMIR Hum Factors. 2021 Oct 26;8(4):e27628. doi: 10.2196/27628.

引用本文的文献

1
Assessing the effect of virtual navigation interventions to improve health insurance literacy and decrease financial burden in cancer survivors: The HINT II study protocol.评估虚拟导航干预对提高癌症幸存者医疗保险素养及减轻经济负担的效果:HINT II研究方案。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2025 Jul;154:107952. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2025.107952. Epub 2025 May 12.
2
A Scoping Review of Interventions to Address Financial Toxicity in Pediatric and Adult Patients and Survivors of Cancer.针对儿科和成年癌症患者及幸存者的财务毒性干预措施的范围综述。
Cancer Med. 2025 Apr;14(8):e70879. doi: 10.1002/cam4.70879.

本文引用的文献

1
Challenges and Possible Solutions to Adapting to Virtual Recruitment: Lessons Learned from a Survey Study during the Covid-19 Pandemic.适应虚拟招聘的挑战和可能的解决方案:新冠疫情期间一项调查研究的经验教训。
Ethics Hum Res. 2022 Nov;44(6):23-31. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500148.
2
Alignment in implementation of evidence-based interventions: a scoping review.基于证据的干预措施实施中的一致性:范围综述。
Implement Sci. 2021 Oct 28;16(1):93. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01160-w.
3
Navigating the high costs of cancer care: opportunities for patient engagement.
应对癌症治疗的高昂费用:患者参与的机遇。
Future Oncol. 2021 Oct;17(28):3729-3742. doi: 10.2217/fon-2021-0341. Epub 2021 Jul 23.
4
Improving Cancer Patients' Insurance Choices (I Can PIC): A Randomized Trial of a Personalized Health Insurance Decision Aid.改善癌症患者的保险选择(I Can PIC):个性化健康保险决策辅助工具的随机试验。
Oncologist. 2020 Jul;25(7):609-619. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0703. Epub 2020 Feb 28.
5
Iterative Decision-making for Evaluation of Adaptations (IDEA): A decision tree for balancing adaptation, fidelity, and intervention impact.适应性评估的迭代决策(IDEA):一种平衡适应性、保真度和干预影响的决策树。
J Community Psychol. 2020 May;48(4):1163-1177. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22279. Epub 2020 Jan 23.
6
The FRAME: an expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions.FRAME:一个扩展的报告基于证据的干预措施的适应性和修改的框架。
Implement Sci. 2019 Jun 6;14(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0898-y.
7
Measuring financial toxicity as a clinically relevant patient-reported outcome: The validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST).将财务毒性作为临床相关的患者报告结局进行测量:财务毒性综合评分(COST)的验证。
Cancer. 2017 Feb 1;123(3):476-484. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30369. Epub 2016 Oct 7.
8
The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience.癌症治疗的财务毒性:一项评估自费支出和参保癌症患者体验的试点研究。
Oncologist. 2013;18(4):381-90. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0279. Epub 2013 Feb 26.
9
Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations.主观算术能力量表的验证:低算术能力对风险沟通理解和效用引出的影响。
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):663-71. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07303824. Epub 2007 Jul 24.
10
Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.无需数学测试来衡量数字能力:主观数字能力量表的编制
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):672-80. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449. Epub 2007 Jul 19.