Cargando…

A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences to provide information on the most appropriate questionnaires to be used when developing clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLIN...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bai, Fei, Ling, Juan, Esoimeme, Gloria, Yao, Liang, Wang, Mingxia, Huang, Jiajun, Shi, Anchen, Cao, Zehui, Chen, Yaolong, Tian, Jinhui, Wang, Xiaoqin, Yang, Kehu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6220727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30464419
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S177540
_version_ 1783368875217256448
author Bai, Fei
Ling, Juan
Esoimeme, Gloria
Yao, Liang
Wang, Mingxia
Huang, Jiajun
Shi, Anchen
Cao, Zehui
Chen, Yaolong
Tian, Jinhui
Wang, Xiaoqin
Yang, Kehu
author_facet Bai, Fei
Ling, Juan
Esoimeme, Gloria
Yao, Liang
Wang, Mingxia
Huang, Jiajun
Shi, Anchen
Cao, Zehui
Chen, Yaolong
Tian, Jinhui
Wang, Xiaoqin
Yang, Kehu
author_sort Bai, Fei
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences to provide information on the most appropriate questionnaires to be used when developing clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wanfang Database was performed to identify studies on questionnaires evaluating patient’s values and preferences. The articles that used fully structured questionnaires or scales with standardized questions and answer options were included. We assessed the questionnaires’ construction and content with a psychometric methodology and summarized the domains and items about patient’s preferences and values. RESULTS: A total of 7,008 records were retrieved by the search strategy and scanned, and 20 articles were finally included. Of these, 10 (50%) articles described the process of item generation and only four questionnaires (20%, 4/20) mentioned the pilot testing. Regarding “validity”, seven questionnaires (35%, 7/20) assessed validity and only one (5%, 1/20) questionnaire assessed internal consistency, with Cornbrash’s α values of 0.74–0.87. For “acceptability”, the time to complete the questionnaires ranged from 10 to 30 minutes and only nine studies (45%, 9/20) reported the response rates. In addition, the results of domains and items about patient’s preferences and values showed that the “effectiveness” domain was the most considered item in the patient’s value questionnaire followed by “safety”, “prognosis”, and others, whereas the least considered domain was “physician’s experience”. CONCLUSION: Only a few studies have developed questionnaires with rigorous psychometric methods to measure patient’s preferences and values. Currently, still there is no valid or reliable questionnaire for patient’s preferences and values for use when developing clinical practice guidelines. Further study should be conducted to develop standardized instruments to measure patient’s preferences and values. This study provides the domains and items that may be used in formulating questionnaires about patient’s preferences and values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6220727
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62207272018-11-21 A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines Bai, Fei Ling, Juan Esoimeme, Gloria Yao, Liang Wang, Mingxia Huang, Jiajun Shi, Anchen Cao, Zehui Chen, Yaolong Tian, Jinhui Wang, Xiaoqin Yang, Kehu Patient Prefer Adherence Review OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences to provide information on the most appropriate questionnaires to be used when developing clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wanfang Database was performed to identify studies on questionnaires evaluating patient’s values and preferences. The articles that used fully structured questionnaires or scales with standardized questions and answer options were included. We assessed the questionnaires’ construction and content with a psychometric methodology and summarized the domains and items about patient’s preferences and values. RESULTS: A total of 7,008 records were retrieved by the search strategy and scanned, and 20 articles were finally included. Of these, 10 (50%) articles described the process of item generation and only four questionnaires (20%, 4/20) mentioned the pilot testing. Regarding “validity”, seven questionnaires (35%, 7/20) assessed validity and only one (5%, 1/20) questionnaire assessed internal consistency, with Cornbrash’s α values of 0.74–0.87. For “acceptability”, the time to complete the questionnaires ranged from 10 to 30 minutes and only nine studies (45%, 9/20) reported the response rates. In addition, the results of domains and items about patient’s preferences and values showed that the “effectiveness” domain was the most considered item in the patient’s value questionnaire followed by “safety”, “prognosis”, and others, whereas the least considered domain was “physician’s experience”. CONCLUSION: Only a few studies have developed questionnaires with rigorous psychometric methods to measure patient’s preferences and values. Currently, still there is no valid or reliable questionnaire for patient’s preferences and values for use when developing clinical practice guidelines. Further study should be conducted to develop standardized instruments to measure patient’s preferences and values. This study provides the domains and items that may be used in formulating questionnaires about patient’s preferences and values. Dove Medical Press 2018-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6220727/ /pubmed/30464419 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S177540 Text en © 2018 Bai et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Bai, Fei
Ling, Juan
Esoimeme, Gloria
Yao, Liang
Wang, Mingxia
Huang, Jiajun
Shi, Anchen
Cao, Zehui
Chen, Yaolong
Tian, Jinhui
Wang, Xiaoqin
Yang, Kehu
A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title_full A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title_fullStr A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title_short A systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
title_sort systematic review of questionnaires about patient’s values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6220727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30464419
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S177540
work_keys_str_mv AT baifei asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT lingjuan asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT esoimemegloria asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT yaoliang asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT wangmingxia asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT huangjiajun asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT shianchen asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT caozehui asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT chenyaolong asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT tianjinhui asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT wangxiaoqin asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT yangkehu asystematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT baifei systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT lingjuan systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT esoimemegloria systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT yaoliang systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT wangmingxia systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT huangjiajun systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT shianchen systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT caozehui systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT chenyaolong systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT tianjinhui systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT wangxiaoqin systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines
AT yangkehu systematicreviewofquestionnairesaboutpatientsvaluesandpreferencesinclinicalpracticeguidelines