Information Therapy (Ix) and Information Prescription: A Systematic Review

V. Z. Gavgani, F. Shokraneh
{"title":"Information Therapy (Ix) and Information Prescription: A Systematic Review","authors":"V. Z. Gavgani, F. Shokraneh","doi":"10.4018/IJUDH.2013040102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To systematically review the observational and control trial evidence on information prescription and information therapy. The Cochrane Library and the medical databases of MEDLINE (1946 to10 April, 2012), and EMBASE (1974 to10 April, 2012) were searched with Ovid SP. The authors included only those studies that are related to the prescription of specific health information for specific patient as a complementary medicine. Therefore, they excluded the traditional patient education studies that are based on background information rather than being foreground, evidence- based and decision focused. The authors identified 232 papers and based on the criteria 34 full texts were screened and finally 18 were reviewed in this study systematically. Six papers were randomized control trials (RCTs) and 12 were observation studies. Most of the studies focused on satisfaction and knowledge as their primary outcomes. None of the studies examined the side effects of information intervention. Only one study focused on the health related primary outcomes and showed no significant change in pain and bowl movement (BMs) among children. This review found considerable research gaps in the study of information prescription outcomes. There is need for cohort studies and RCTs with rigorous control of confounding factors to figure out the impact of information prescription and information therapy on patient care.","PeriodicalId":211533,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of User-Driven Healthcare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of User-Driven Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/IJUDH.2013040102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

To systematically review the observational and control trial evidence on information prescription and information therapy. The Cochrane Library and the medical databases of MEDLINE (1946 to10 April, 2012), and EMBASE (1974 to10 April, 2012) were searched with Ovid SP. The authors included only those studies that are related to the prescription of specific health information for specific patient as a complementary medicine. Therefore, they excluded the traditional patient education studies that are based on background information rather than being foreground, evidence- based and decision focused. The authors identified 232 papers and based on the criteria 34 full texts were screened and finally 18 were reviewed in this study systematically. Six papers were randomized control trials (RCTs) and 12 were observation studies. Most of the studies focused on satisfaction and knowledge as their primary outcomes. None of the studies examined the side effects of information intervention. Only one study focused on the health related primary outcomes and showed no significant change in pain and bowl movement (BMs) among children. This review found considerable research gaps in the study of information prescription outcomes. There is need for cohort studies and RCTs with rigorous control of confounding factors to figure out the impact of information prescription and information therapy on patient care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信息治疗(九)与信息处方:系统综述
系统回顾信息处方和信息治疗的观察性和对照性试验证据。Ovid SP检索了Cochrane图书馆、MEDLINE医学数据库(1946年至2012年4月10日)和EMBASE医学数据库(1974年至2012年4月10日)。作者只纳入了那些与特定患者的特定健康信息处方相关的研究,作为补充药物。因此,他们排除了传统的基于背景信息的患者教育研究,而不是基于前景、证据和决策的研究。本研究共收录了232篇论文,根据标准筛选了34篇全文,最后对其中18篇进行了系统综述。6篇为随机对照试验(RCTs), 12篇为观察性研究。大多数研究将满意度和知识作为主要结果。没有一项研究调查了信息干预的副作用。只有一项研究关注与健康相关的主要结果,并显示儿童的疼痛和碗状运动(BMs)没有显著变化。本综述发现在信息处方结果的研究中存在相当大的研究空白。需要通过严格控制混杂因素的队列研究和随机对照试验来研究信息处方和信息治疗对患者护理的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Online Communities. Benefits and Risks Uncertainty in Clinical Knowledge: A Critical Dimension of Quality Evaluation Abnormal Uterine Bleeding (AUB) and Thyroid Function in Chhattisgarh Survival Fight of a Teen With Polytrauma, Severe Head Injury, Gr-V Liver Injury Followed By ARDS, Managed in a Rural Hospital of Andaman, India: Perseverance Gives Possibilities Even With Limited Resources Missing Link of the Health Information Exchange Loop: Engaging Patients
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1