医疗保健中患者和一般人群的决策风格:范围综述。

IF 2.2 Q1 NURSING
NURSING FORUM Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1111/nuf.12775
Hitomi Danya, Kazuhiro Nakayama
{"title":"医疗保健中患者和一般人群的决策风格:范围综述。","authors":"Hitomi Danya,&nbsp;Kazuhiro Nakayama","doi":"10.1111/nuf.12775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Decision-making styles form the backbone of effective decision-making and show promise as an important construct that warrants further attention. We investigated what is known about decision-making styles among patients and the general population in a health care setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework and searched PubMed and CINAHL databases using relevant combinations of keywords and subject headings. Articles were limited to those published in English up to February 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. We found that decision-making styles were described as role preferences or personality, psychological, and cognitive factors that influence decision-making. In the identified studies, the evidence was scarce regarding decision-making styles as the foundation for effective decision-making. Moreover, most studies were vague in the description of decision-making styles, offered little explanation of the concept, and varied substantially in the terminology, numbers, and types of decision-making styles and measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Decision-making styles, as a dynamic process, have received little attention in health care and are rarely addressed in health communication research or investigations of decision-making support. Other frameworks that are not directly related to decision-making styles were used in most analyzed studies.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Decision-making styles in health care should be reinterpreted as a dynamic process that can be developed or changed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51525,"journal":{"name":"NURSING FORUM","volume":"57 6","pages":"1012-1025"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-making styles of patients and general population in health care: A scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Hitomi Danya,&nbsp;Kazuhiro Nakayama\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nuf.12775\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Decision-making styles form the backbone of effective decision-making and show promise as an important construct that warrants further attention. We investigated what is known about decision-making styles among patients and the general population in a health care setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework and searched PubMed and CINAHL databases using relevant combinations of keywords and subject headings. Articles were limited to those published in English up to February 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. We found that decision-making styles were described as role preferences or personality, psychological, and cognitive factors that influence decision-making. In the identified studies, the evidence was scarce regarding decision-making styles as the foundation for effective decision-making. Moreover, most studies were vague in the description of decision-making styles, offered little explanation of the concept, and varied substantially in the terminology, numbers, and types of decision-making styles and measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Decision-making styles, as a dynamic process, have received little attention in health care and are rarely addressed in health communication research or investigations of decision-making support. Other frameworks that are not directly related to decision-making styles were used in most analyzed studies.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Decision-making styles in health care should be reinterpreted as a dynamic process that can be developed or changed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NURSING FORUM\",\"volume\":\"57 6\",\"pages\":\"1012-1025\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NURSING FORUM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12775\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NURSING FORUM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:决策风格是有效决策的支柱,是值得进一步关注的重要结构。我们调查了什么是已知的决策风格的病人和一般人群在卫生保健设置。方法:采用Arksey和O'Malley的框架,使用关键词和主题标题的相关组合检索PubMed和CINAHL数据库。文章仅限于在2020年2月之前以英文发表的文章。结果:16篇文章符合纳入标准。我们发现决策风格被描述为影响决策的角色偏好或个性、心理和认知因素。在已确定的研究中,很少有证据表明决策风格是有效决策的基础。此外,大多数研究对决策风格的描述含糊不清,对这一概念的解释很少,而且在决策风格的术语、数量和类型以及测量方法方面存在很大差异。结论:决策风格作为一个动态过程,在卫生保健中很少受到重视,在卫生传播研究或决策支持调查中很少涉及。在大多数分析研究中使用了与决策风格没有直接关系的其他框架。实践影响:应当将卫生保健的决策方式重新解释为一个可以发展或改变的动态过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Decision-making styles of patients and general population in health care: A scoping review.

Objective: Decision-making styles form the backbone of effective decision-making and show promise as an important construct that warrants further attention. We investigated what is known about decision-making styles among patients and the general population in a health care setting.

Methods: We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework and searched PubMed and CINAHL databases using relevant combinations of keywords and subject headings. Articles were limited to those published in English up to February 2020.

Results: Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. We found that decision-making styles were described as role preferences or personality, psychological, and cognitive factors that influence decision-making. In the identified studies, the evidence was scarce regarding decision-making styles as the foundation for effective decision-making. Moreover, most studies were vague in the description of decision-making styles, offered little explanation of the concept, and varied substantially in the terminology, numbers, and types of decision-making styles and measurement methods.

Conclusions: Decision-making styles, as a dynamic process, have received little attention in health care and are rarely addressed in health communication research or investigations of decision-making support. Other frameworks that are not directly related to decision-making styles were used in most analyzed studies.

Practice implications: Decision-making styles in health care should be reinterpreted as a dynamic process that can be developed or changed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
NURSING FORUM
NURSING FORUM NURSING-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.20%
发文量
151
期刊介绍: Nursing Forum is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal that invites original manuscripts that explore, explicate or report issues, ideas, trends and innovations that shape the nursing profession. Research manuscripts should emphasize the implications rather than the methods or analysis. Quality improvement manuscripts should emphasize the outcomes and follow the SQUIRE Guidelines in creating the manuscript. Evidence-based manuscripts should emphasize the findings and implications for practice and follow PICOT format. Concept analysis manuscripts should emphasize the evidence for support of the concept and follow an accepted format for such analyses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信