Communicating health risk in chronic kidney disease: a scoping review.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1007/s40620-024-02098-0
Emma Caton, Ros Aird, Maria Da Silva-Gane, Sivakumar Sridharan, David Wellsted, Shivani Sharma, Ken Farrington
{"title":"Communicating health risk in chronic kidney disease: a scoping review.","authors":"Emma Caton, Ros Aird, Maria Da Silva-Gane, Sivakumar Sridharan, David Wellsted, Shivani Sharma, Ken Farrington","doi":"10.1007/s40620-024-02098-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Communicating risk is a key component of shared decision-making and is vital for the management of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Despite this, there is little evidence to suggest how best to communicate health risk information to people living with CKD. The aim of this review was to identify and understand the nature of evidence-based risk communication strategies for people living with CKD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus databases for articles which described or evaluated the use of risk communication strategies within the renal population. Similar risk communication strategies were collated and summarised narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3700 sources were retrieved from the search, of which 19 were included in the review. Eleven studies reported primary research, and eight reported either narrative or systematic reviews. Seven main risk communication strategies were identified: framing, absolute versus relative risk, natural frequencies versus percentages, personalised risk estimates, qualitative risk communication, best-case/worst-case framework and use of graphs and graphics. There was a paucity of risk communication strategies specific to the CKD population.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evidence-based strategies to improve health risk communication for patients living with CKD are lacking. There is a need to establish the informational and communication preferences for patients living with CKD to better understand how to best communicate health risk information to individuals in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":16542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40620-024-02098-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Communicating risk is a key component of shared decision-making and is vital for the management of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Despite this, there is little evidence to suggest how best to communicate health risk information to people living with CKD. The aim of this review was to identify and understand the nature of evidence-based risk communication strategies for people living with CKD.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus databases for articles which described or evaluated the use of risk communication strategies within the renal population. Similar risk communication strategies were collated and summarised narratively.

Results: A total of 3700 sources were retrieved from the search, of which 19 were included in the review. Eleven studies reported primary research, and eight reported either narrative or systematic reviews. Seven main risk communication strategies were identified: framing, absolute versus relative risk, natural frequencies versus percentages, personalised risk estimates, qualitative risk communication, best-case/worst-case framework and use of graphs and graphics. There was a paucity of risk communication strategies specific to the CKD population.

Conclusion: Evidence-based strategies to improve health risk communication for patients living with CKD are lacking. There is a need to establish the informational and communication preferences for patients living with CKD to better understand how to best communicate health risk information to individuals in this population.

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
传播慢性肾脏病的健康风险:范围界定综述。
背景:风险交流是共同决策的关键组成部分,对于晚期慢性肾脏病(CKD)的管理至关重要。尽管如此,几乎没有证据表明如何才能最好地向 CKD 患者传达健康风险信息。本综述旨在确定和了解针对 CKD 患者的循证风险沟通策略的性质:我们在 MEDLINE、CINAHL 和 Scopus 数据库中检索了描述或评估肾脏病人群风险沟通策略使用情况的文章。我们对类似的风险交流策略进行了整理和总结:结果:共检索到 3700 篇资料,其中 19 篇被纳入综述。11 项研究报告了初步研究,8 项报告了叙述性或系统性综述。确定了七种主要的风险交流策略:框架、绝对风险与相对风险、自然频率与百分比、个性化风险估计、定性风险交流、最佳情况/最坏情况框架以及图表的使用。针对慢性肾脏病人群的风险沟通策略还很少:结论:改善慢性肾脏病患者健康风险沟通的循证策略还很缺乏。有必要确定慢性肾脏病患者的信息和沟通偏好,以便更好地了解如何向这一人群传达最佳的健康风险信息。
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
Journal of Nephrology
Journal of Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Nephrology is a bimonthly journal that considers publication of peer reviewed original manuscripts dealing with both clinical and laboratory investigations of relevance to the broad fields of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation. It is the Official Journal of the Italian Society of Nephrology (SIN).
期刊最新文献
A green-nephrology Christmas present: "Life of a Tin Can" by Gabriele Pellegrini introduced by Giorgina B Piccoli. Identification and treatment of myeloma cast nephropathy with crystalline light chain proximal tubulopathy induced by Vλ2 light chain. Effect of vitamin K1 supplementation on coronary calcifications in hemodialysis patients: a randomized controlled trial. Comparison between female kidney donors with prediabetes and without diabetes in blood pressure measurements, kidney and diabetes biomarkers: a prospective cohort study. Generalizability of kidney and cardiovascular protection by finerenone to the real world in Italy: insights from Fidelio and Figaro studies.
×
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