...
首页> 外文期刊>The British journal of general practice: the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners >Recommendations for future studies: a systematic review of educational interventions in primary care settings.
【24h】

Recommendations for future studies: a systematic review of educational interventions in primary care settings.

机译:对未来研究的建议:对基层医疗机构的教育干预措施进行系统的回顾。

获取原文
           

摘要

Systematic reviews are an important part of the current move towards evidence-based practice. Independent reviewers use a variety of search strategies to identify and assess relevant articles in the field of concern. Criteria for quality must be agreed and articles evaluated accordingly. This study systematically reviewed educational interventions targeting physicians in primary care (excluding hospital clinic and academic settings) to determine their effectiveness in changing behaviour and to investigate whether studies gave information about the resource implications of the interventions described and their rationale for choosing a particular target group. Studies in English, French, or German language journals were included. The review applied the criteria of the Cochrane Collaboration for methodological quality of studies (but was not conducted under the auspices of the Cochrane Collaboration). The results showed that relatively few studies had occurred in primary care compared with academic and hospital clinic settings. Many articles did not fit the criteria for rigour of method, and those that did were very heterogeneous in method and target group. Only two studies assessed resource implications, and one study also calculated economic benefits. The review suggests that future studies should either target geographical areas or doctors with an identifiable learning need associated with patient outcome, and that studies should be evaluated on their 'intention to educate'. Evaluations of educational initiatives need to describe the resource implications versus measurable benefits of the intervention to make their studies useful to policymakers and planners of educational provision.
机译:系统评价是当前向循证实践迈进的重要组成部分。独立审稿人使用各种搜索策略来识别和评估关注领域中的相关文章。必须商定质量标准,并据此对物品进行评估。这项研究系统地回顾了针对初级保健医生(不包括医院诊所和学术机构)的教育干预措施,以确定其在改变行为方面的有效性,并调查研究是否提供了有关所描述的干预措施的资源含义以及选择特定目标人群的理由的信息。 。包括英文,法文或德文期刊的研究。该审查将Cochrane合作标准用于研究的方法学质量(但未在Cochrane合作的主持下进行)。结果表明,与学术和医院诊所设置相比,在初级保健中进行的研究相对较少。许多文章不符合严格的方法标准,而那些文章在方法和目标人群方面却非常不同。只有两项研究评估了资源影响,一项研究也计算了经济利益。该评论建议,未来的研究应针对地理区域或具有可识别的学习需求且与患者结局相关的医生,并且应根据研究的“教育意图”对研究进行评估。对教育举措的评估需要描述干预措施的资源影响和可衡量的好处,以使其研究对教育提供的政策制定者和计划者有用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号