Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines (2021RU017), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines (2021RU017), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Sep;173:111429. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111429. Epub 2024 Jun 14.
Patient and public versions of guidelines (PVGs) have gradually gained wide recognition and attention from the public and the society due to their scientific, professional, and authoritative characteristics. This study aims to survey the awareness and knowledge of PVGs among stakeholders in China.
This was a cross-sectional survey among stakeholders (guideline developers, clinicians, journal editors, patients, and the public) in China. We self-designed the questionnaire and distributed it through the Questionnaire Star platform. The primary outcomes were awareness of PVGs and opinions about the development methodology, writing, dissemination, and implementation of PVGs. The Kruskal-Wallis H test and post hoc multiple comparison tests were used to compare the levels of awareness of PVGs between different subgroups of respondents.
A total of 1319 valid questionnaires were collected: 722 from guideline developers, 136 from clinicians, 83 from journal editors, 284 from patients, and 94 from members of the public. Of all respondents, 253 (19.2%) had not heard of PVGs, 349 (26.5%) had heard of PVGs but had no further knowledge, 475 (36.0%) had some knowledge of PVGs, and 242 (18.3%) were familiar with or had participated in the development of PVGs. Guideline developers, clinicians, and journal editors had higher awareness than patients and the public. Higher education and older age also correlated with higher awareness of PVGs. More than half (52.9%) of guideline developers considered that both rewriting of the source guidelines and direct development as independent documents were appropriate methods for developing PVGs. The survey respondents agreed that clinicians (97.3%), guideline methodologists (76.6%), representatives of patients and the public (74.5%), and medical editors or writers (63.4%) should participate in the development of PVGs. More than 80% of the respondents agreed that the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations should be presented; however, there was no consensus in the form of presentation.
The level of awareness of PVGs among stakeholders in China is relatively low and differs between different stakeholder groups, but the majority of key stakeholders have a positive attitude toward PVGs. The collection of the perspectives and opinions on the development methods, writing, dissemination, and implementation provides a key reference and basis for the future optimization and improvement of PVGs development.
由于患者和公众版指南(PVGs)具有科学性、专业性和权威性等特点,逐渐得到了公众和社会的广泛认可和关注。本研究旨在调查中国利益相关者对 PVGs 的认知和了解程度。
这是一项在中国的利益相关者(指南制定者、临床医生、期刊编辑、患者和公众)中进行的横断面调查。我们自行设计了问卷,并通过问卷星平台进行了分发。主要结果是对 PVGs 的认知程度以及对其发展方法、撰写、传播和实施的看法。采用 Kruskal-Wallis H 检验和事后多重比较检验比较不同受访者亚组对 PVGs 的认知水平。
共收集到 1319 份有效问卷:722 份来自指南制定者,136 份来自临床医生,83 份来自期刊编辑,284 份来自患者,94 份来自公众。在所有受访者中,253 人(19.2%)从未听说过 PVGs,349 人(26.5%)听说过 PVGs,但不了解,475 人(36.0%)对 PVGs有一定了解,242 人(18.3%)熟悉或参与过 PVGs 的制定。指南制定者、临床医生和期刊编辑的认知度高于患者和公众。较高的教育水平和较年长的年龄与对 PVGs 的较高认知度相关。超过一半(52.9%)的指南制定者认为改写源指南和直接开发独立文件都是开发 PVGs 的合适方法。调查对象认为,临床医生(97.3%)、指南方法学家(76.6%)、患者和公众代表(74.5%)以及医学编辑或作者(63.4%)应该参与 PVGs 的制定。超过 80%的受访者同意应呈现证据质量和推荐强度;然而,在呈现形式上没有达成共识。
中国利益相关者对 PVGs 的认知度相对较低,不同利益相关者群体之间存在差异,但大多数主要利益相关者对 PVGs 持积极态度。收集对发展方法、撰写、传播和实施的看法和意见,为未来优化和改进 PVGs 的制定提供了关键参考和依据。