Cargando…

Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures

BACKGROUND: Providing patient information is a central aspect of patient-centered care. Fulfilling personal information needs has positive effects on several health-related outcomes. Measurement instruments help to identify individual information needs in an effective way. The present study gives an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Christalle, Eva, Zill, Jördis M., Frerichs, Wiebke, Härter, Martin, Nestoriuc, Yvonne, Dirmaier, Jörg, Scholl, Isabelle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6354974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30703103
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209165
_version_ 1783391279791472640
author Christalle, Eva
Zill, Jördis M.
Frerichs, Wiebke
Härter, Martin
Nestoriuc, Yvonne
Dirmaier, Jörg
Scholl, Isabelle
author_facet Christalle, Eva
Zill, Jördis M.
Frerichs, Wiebke
Härter, Martin
Nestoriuc, Yvonne
Dirmaier, Jörg
Scholl, Isabelle
author_sort Christalle, Eva
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Providing patient information is a central aspect of patient-centered care. Fulfilling personal information needs has positive effects on several health-related outcomes. Measurement instruments help to identify individual information needs in an effective way. The present study gives an overview of existing information needs measures and further evaluates the quality of their psychometric properties and their psychometric studies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search on psychometric studies of measures that assess information needs in PubMed and Embase. Furthermore, we carried out a secondary search with reference and citation tracking of the included articles. Title, abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers for eligibility. We extracted data on content of the measures, validation samples and psychometric properties. In addition we rated the methodological quality with the COSMIN checklist and the quality of psychometric properties with the criteria of Terwee and colleagues. RESULTS: 24 studies on 21 measures were included. Most instruments assessed information needs of patients with cancer or cardiac diseases. The majority of the instruments were in English language and from western countries. Most studies included information on internal consistency and content validity. The ratings showed mixed results with clear deficiencies in the methodological quality of most studies. DISCUSSION: This is the first systematic review that summarized the existing evidence on measures on patient information needs using two instruments for a systematic quality assessment. The results show a need for more psychometric studies on existing measures. In addition, reporting on psychometric studies needs to be improved to be able to evaluate the reliability of the psychometric properties. Furthermore, we were not able to identify any measures on information needs for some frequent chronic diseases. Other methods to elicit information needs (e.g. open-ended interviews, question prompt sheets) could be considered as alternatives if sound measures are missing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6354974
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63549742019-02-15 Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures Christalle, Eva Zill, Jördis M. Frerichs, Wiebke Härter, Martin Nestoriuc, Yvonne Dirmaier, Jörg Scholl, Isabelle PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Providing patient information is a central aspect of patient-centered care. Fulfilling personal information needs has positive effects on several health-related outcomes. Measurement instruments help to identify individual information needs in an effective way. The present study gives an overview of existing information needs measures and further evaluates the quality of their psychometric properties and their psychometric studies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search on psychometric studies of measures that assess information needs in PubMed and Embase. Furthermore, we carried out a secondary search with reference and citation tracking of the included articles. Title, abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers for eligibility. We extracted data on content of the measures, validation samples and psychometric properties. In addition we rated the methodological quality with the COSMIN checklist and the quality of psychometric properties with the criteria of Terwee and colleagues. RESULTS: 24 studies on 21 measures were included. Most instruments assessed information needs of patients with cancer or cardiac diseases. The majority of the instruments were in English language and from western countries. Most studies included information on internal consistency and content validity. The ratings showed mixed results with clear deficiencies in the methodological quality of most studies. DISCUSSION: This is the first systematic review that summarized the existing evidence on measures on patient information needs using two instruments for a systematic quality assessment. The results show a need for more psychometric studies on existing measures. In addition, reporting on psychometric studies needs to be improved to be able to evaluate the reliability of the psychometric properties. Furthermore, we were not able to identify any measures on information needs for some frequent chronic diseases. Other methods to elicit information needs (e.g. open-ended interviews, question prompt sheets) could be considered as alternatives if sound measures are missing. Public Library of Science 2019-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6354974/ /pubmed/30703103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209165 Text en © 2019 Christalle et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Christalle, Eva
Zill, Jördis M.
Frerichs, Wiebke
Härter, Martin
Nestoriuc, Yvonne
Dirmaier, Jörg
Scholl, Isabelle
Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title_full Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title_fullStr Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title_short Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures
title_sort assessment of patient information needs: a systematic review of measures
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6354974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30703103
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209165
work_keys_str_mv AT christalleeva assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT zilljordism assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT frerichswiebke assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT hartermartin assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT nestoriucyvonne assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT dirmaierjorg assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures
AT schollisabelle assessmentofpatientinformationneedsasystematicreviewofmeasures