Methods to incorporate patient preferences into medical decision algorithms and models and their quantification, balancing and evaluation: a scoping review protocol.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JBI evidence synthesis Pub Date : 2024-08-27 DOI:10.11124/JBIES-23-00498
Jakub Fusiak, Ulrich Mansmann, Verena S Hoffmann
{"title":"Methods to incorporate patient preferences into medical decision algorithms and models and their quantification, balancing and evaluation: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Jakub Fusiak, Ulrich Mansmann, Verena S Hoffmann","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map methods used to incorporate patient preferences into medical algorithms and models as well report on their quantification, balancing, and evaluation in the literature. It will focus on computational methods used for incorporating patient preferences into algorithms and models at an individual level as well as the types of medical algorithms and models where these methods have been applied.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Medical algorithms and models are increasingly being used to support clinical and shared decision-making; however, their effectiveness, accuracy, acceptance, and comprehension may be limited if patients' preferences are not considered. To address this issue, it is important to explore methods integrating patient preferences.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This review will investigate patient preferences and their integration into medical algorithms and models for individual-level clinical decision-making. The scoping review will include diverse sources, such as peer-reviewed articles, clinical practice guidelines, gray literature, government reports, guidelines, and expert opinions for a comprehensive investigation of the subject.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review will follow JBI methodology. A comprehensive search will be conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, the National Technical Reports Library, and the first 20 pages of Google Scholar. The search strategy will include keywords related to patient preferences, medical algorithms and models, decision-making, and software tools and frameworks. Data extraction and analysis will be guided by the JBI framework, which includes an explorative and qualitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>Open Science Framework https://osf.io/qg3b5.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00498","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map methods used to incorporate patient preferences into medical algorithms and models as well report on their quantification, balancing, and evaluation in the literature. It will focus on computational methods used for incorporating patient preferences into algorithms and models at an individual level as well as the types of medical algorithms and models where these methods have been applied.

Introduction: Medical algorithms and models are increasingly being used to support clinical and shared decision-making; however, their effectiveness, accuracy, acceptance, and comprehension may be limited if patients' preferences are not considered. To address this issue, it is important to explore methods integrating patient preferences.

Inclusion criteria: This review will investigate patient preferences and their integration into medical algorithms and models for individual-level clinical decision-making. The scoping review will include diverse sources, such as peer-reviewed articles, clinical practice guidelines, gray literature, government reports, guidelines, and expert opinions for a comprehensive investigation of the subject.

Methods: This scoping review will follow JBI methodology. A comprehensive search will be conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, the National Technical Reports Library, and the first 20 pages of Google Scholar. The search strategy will include keywords related to patient preferences, medical algorithms and models, decision-making, and software tools and frameworks. Data extraction and analysis will be guided by the JBI framework, which includes an explorative and qualitative analysis.

Review registration: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/qg3b5.

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
将患者偏好纳入医疗决策算法和模型的方法及其量化、平衡和评估:范围审查协议。
目的:本范围综述旨在确定和绘制用于将患者偏好纳入医疗算法和模型的方法,并报告这些方法在文献中的量化、平衡和评估情况。它将重点关注用于将患者偏好纳入个体层面算法和模型的计算方法,以及应用这些方法的医疗算法和模型类型:然而,如果不考虑患者的偏好,这些算法和模型的有效性、准确性、接受度和理解力可能会受到限制。为解决这一问题,探索整合患者偏好的方法非常重要:本综述将调查患者偏好及其与医疗算法和模型的整合情况,以用于个体层面的临床决策。范围界定综述将包括多种来源,如同行评议文章、临床实践指南、灰色文献、政府报告、指南和专家意见,以便对该主题进行全面调查:本次范围界定审查将采用 JBI 方法。将在 PubMed、Web of Science、ACM Digital Library、IEEE Xplore、Cochrane Library、OpenGrey、National Technical Reports Library 和 Google Scholar 的前 20 页进行全面搜索。搜索策略将包括与患者偏好、医学算法和模型、决策以及软件工具和框架相关的关键词。数据提取和分析将以 JBI 框架为指导,其中包括探索性和定性分析:开放科学框架 https://osf.io/qg3b5。
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
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
期刊最新文献
Value-based outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care: a scoping review. Parents' and guardians' experiences of barriers and facilitators in accessing autism spectrum disorder diagnostic services for their children: a qualitative systematic review. Evidence on the accreditation of health professionals' education in the WHO Africa region: a scoping review protocol. Barriers and facilitators to designing, maintaining, and utilizing rare disease patient registries: a scoping review protocol. Supporting professional practice transition in undergraduate nursing education: a scoping review protocol.
×
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