Suppr超能文献

基层医疗调查的应答者与基层医疗的典型使用者相比如何?两项调查的比较。

How do respondents of primary care surveys compare to typical users of primary care? A comparison of two surveys.

机构信息

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College St, Unit 425, Toronto, Canada.

Department of Family & Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Prim Care. 2023 Mar 24;24(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12875-023-02029-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Primary care surveys are a key source of evaluative data; understanding how survey respondents compare to the intended population is important to understand results in context. The objective of this study was to examine the physician and patient representativeness of two primary care surveys (TRANSFORMATION and QUALICOPC) that each used different sampling and recruitment techniques.

METHODS

We linked the physician and patient participants of the two surveys to health administrative databases. Patients were compared to other patients visiting the practice on the same day and other randomly selected dates using sociodemographic data, chronic disease diagnosis, and health system utilization. Physicians were compared to other physicians in the same practice, and other physicians in the intended geographic area using sociodemographic and practice characteristics.

RESULTS

Physician respondents of the TRANSFORMATION survey included more males compared to their practice groups, but not to other physicians in the area. TRANSFORMATION physicians cared for a larger roster of patients than other physicians in the area. Patient respondents of the QUALICOPC survey did not have meaningful differences from other patients who visit the practice. Patient respondents of the TRANSFORMATION survey resided in more rural areas, had less chronic disease, and had lower use of health services than other patients visiting the practice.

CONCLUSION

Differences in survey recruitment methods at the physician and patient level may help to explain some of the differences in representativeness. When conducting primary care surveys, investigators should consider diverse methods of ensuring representativeness to limit the potential for nonresponse bias.

摘要

背景

初级保健调查是评估数据的主要来源;了解调查受访者与目标人群的差异对于在上下文中理解结果非常重要。本研究的目的是检查两种初级保健调查(转型和 QUALICOPC)的医生和患者代表性,这两种调查都使用了不同的抽样和招募技术。

方法

我们将两个调查的医生和患者参与者与健康管理数据库进行了链接。使用社会人口统计学数据、慢性病诊断和卫生系统利用情况,将患者与同一实践中当天或其他随机选定日期的其他患者进行比较。使用社会人口统计学和实践特征,将医生与同一实践中的其他医生以及目标地理区域的其他医生进行比较。

结果

转型调查的医生受访者与实践群体相比,男性比例较高,但与该地区的其他医生相比则不然。转型医生照顾的患者人数多于该地区的其他医生。QUALICOPC 调查的患者受访者与访问实践的其他患者没有明显差异。转型调查的患者受访者居住在较农村地区,慢性病较少,卫生服务利用率低于访问实践的其他患者。

结论

在医生和患者层面上,调查招募方法的差异可能有助于解释代表性的一些差异。在进行初级保健调查时,研究人员应考虑采用多种方法来确保代表性,以限制无应答偏差的潜在影响。

相似文献

4
5
Building a sustainable rural physician workforce.建设可持续的农村医师队伍。
Med J Aust. 2021 Jul;215 Suppl 1:S5-S33. doi: 10.5694/mja2.51122.
9

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验