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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |