首页> 外文期刊>Palliative medicine >Evaluating psycho-educational interventions for informal carers of patients receiving cancer care or palliative care: strengths and limitations of different study designs.
【24h】

Evaluating psycho-educational interventions for informal carers of patients receiving cancer care or palliative care: strengths and limitations of different study designs.

机译:为接受癌症治疗或姑息治疗的患者的非正式护理人员评估心理教育干预措施:不同研究设计的优势和局限性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Despite evidence of negative psychological sequelae and unmet needs, there are few evaluated interventions for informal caregivers in cancer and palliative care. The aim of this article is to debate the strengths and limitations of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other designs that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions. Psycho-educational interventions are used as example for this debate article, as a number of studies of various designs evaluating this type of intervention have been published. Systematic searching in Medline and the bibliography of a relevant systematic review identified five RCTs, one pre-test/post-test study with a control group and six one-group pre-test/post-test studies of psycho-educational interventions for caregivers. The methodological strengths and weaknesses were assessed. RCTs are seen as the gold standard, but can have important limitations in the context of carer intervention research, including biased recruitment and low generalizability, problems with blinding and attrition. Pre-test/post-test studies with a control group may be more feasible and more generalizable. Their crucial limitation is selection bias. Before-after studies are compromised by additional specific biases and therefore are the weakest of all discussed designs. After analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the mentioned study designs, this paper presents strategies to address the limitations of RCTs evaluating psycho-educational interventions for carers in cancer or palliative care.
机译:尽管有负面的心理后遗症和需求未得到满足的证据,但很少有经过评估的针对癌症和姑息治疗中非正式护理人员的干预措施。本文旨在探讨随机对照试验(RCT)和其他可用于评估这些干预措施有效性的设计的优缺点。本辩论文章以心理教育干预为例,因为已发表了许多评估这种干预的各种设计研究。在Medline中进行系统搜索和相关系统评价的参考书目,确定了5项RCT,一项与对照组的测试前/测试后研究以及六项针对护理人员的心理教育干预措施的单组测试前/测试后研究。评估了方法的优缺点。 RCT被视为黄金标准,但在护理人员干预研究的背景下可能具有重要的局限性,包括招募偏见和普遍性低,盲目和磨损问题。与对照组的测试前/测试后研究可能更可行,更通用。他们的关键限制是选择偏见。之前的研究因其他特定的偏见而受到损害,因此是所有讨论的设计中最弱的。在分析了上述研究设计的优势和劣势之后,本文提出了解决RCT评估癌症或姑息治疗护理人员心理教育干预措施局限性的策略。

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