Suppr超能文献

有限健康素养患者的共享决策中获益和危害的沟通:风险沟通策略的系统评价。

Communication of benefits and harms in shared decision making with patients with limited health literacy: A systematic review of risk communication strategies.

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Nov;116:107944. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107944. Epub 2023 Aug 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Risk communication (RC), as part of shared decision making, is challenging with people with limited health literacy (LHL). We aim to provide an overview of strategies to communicate benefits and harms of diagnostic and treatment options to this group.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cinahl and PsycInfo. We included 28 studies on RC in informed/shared decision making without restriction to a health setting or condition and using a broad conceptualization of health literacy. Two researchers independently selected studies and one researcher performed data extraction. We descriptively compared findings for people with LHL towards recommendations for RC.

RESULTS

Health literacy levels varied in the included studies. Most studies used experimental designs, primarily on visual RC. Findings show verbal RC alone should be avoided. Framing of risk information influences risk perception (less risky when positively framed, riskier when negatively framed). Most studies recommended the use of icon arrays. Graph literacy should be considered when using visual RC.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited available evidence suggests that recommended RC strategies seem mainly to be valid for people with LHL, but more research is required.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

More qualitative research involving people with LHL is needed to gain further in-depth insights into optimal RC strategies.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ID 275022.

摘要

目的

风险沟通(RC)作为共同决策的一部分,对于健康素养有限(LHL)的人来说具有挑战性。我们旨在提供概述,介绍向这一群体传达诊断和治疗选择的益处和危害的策略。

方法

我们系统地检索了 PubMed、Embase、Cinahl 和 PsycInfo。我们纳入了 28 项关于无健康设置或条件限制且广泛概念化健康素养的知情/共同决策中的 RC 的研究。两名研究人员独立选择研究,一名研究人员进行数据提取。我们针对 LHL 人群对 RC 的建议,对发现结果进行了描述性比较。

结果

纳入研究中的健康素养水平各不相同。大多数研究采用了实验设计,主要针对视觉 RC。研究结果表明,单独使用口头 RC 应避免。风险信息的呈现方式会影响风险感知(正面呈现时风险较低,负面呈现时风险较高)。大多数研究建议使用图标数组。在使用视觉 RC 时应考虑图表素养。

结论

有限的可用证据表明,建议的 RC 策略似乎主要适用于健康素养有限的人群,但仍需要更多研究。

实践意义

需要更多涉及健康素养有限人群的定性研究,以深入了解最佳 RC 策略。

注册协议

PROSPERO ID 275022。

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