西方国家全科医生对 2 型糖尿病信息的需求。系统综述。

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-31 Print Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2023.0531
Tue Helms Andersen, Thomas Møller Marcussen, Ole Nørgaard
{"title":"西方国家全科医生对 2 型糖尿病信息的需求。系统综述。","authors":"Tue Helms Andersen, Thomas Møller Marcussen, Ole Nørgaard","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2023.0531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most people with type 2 diabetes receive treatment in primary care by GPs who are not specialised in diabetes. Thus, it is important to uncover the most essential information needs regarding type 2 diabetes in general practice.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify information needs related to type 2 diabetes for GPs.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Systematic review focused on literature relating to Western countries.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from inception to January 2024. Two researchers conducted the selection process, and citation searches were performed to identify any relevant articles missed by the database search. Quality appraisal was conducted with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Meaning units were coded individually, grouped into categories, and then studies were summarised within the context of these categories using narrative synthesis. An evidence map was created to highlight research gaps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine included studies revealed eight main categories and 36 subcategories of information needs. Categories were organised into a comprehensive hierarchical model of information needs, suggesting 'Knowledge of guidelines' and 'Reasons for referral' as general information needs alongside more specific needs on 'Medication', 'Management', 'Complications', 'Diagnosis', 'Risk factors', and 'Screening for diabetes'. The evidence map provides readers with the opportunity to explore the characteristics of the included studies in detail.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This systematic review provides GPs, policymakers, and researchers with a hierarchical model of information and educational needs for GPs, and an evidence map showing gaps in the current literature. Information needs about clinical guidelines and reasons for referral to specialised care overlapped with needs for more specific information.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":"e749-e757"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11388096/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Information needs for GPs on type 2 diabetes in Western countries: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Tue Helms Andersen, Thomas Møller Marcussen, Ole Nørgaard\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGP.2023.0531\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most people with type 2 diabetes receive treatment in primary care by GPs who are not specialised in diabetes. Thus, it is important to uncover the most essential information needs regarding type 2 diabetes in general practice.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify information needs related to type 2 diabetes for GPs.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Systematic review focused on literature relating to Western countries.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from inception to January 2024. Two researchers conducted the selection process, and citation searches were performed to identify any relevant articles missed by the database search. Quality appraisal was conducted with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Meaning units were coded individually, grouped into categories, and then studies were summarised within the context of these categories using narrative synthesis. An evidence map was created to highlight research gaps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine included studies revealed eight main categories and 36 subcategories of information needs. Categories were organised into a comprehensive hierarchical model of information needs, suggesting 'Knowledge of guidelines' and 'Reasons for referral' as general information needs alongside more specific needs on 'Medication', 'Management', 'Complications', 'Diagnosis', 'Risk factors', and 'Screening for diabetes'. The evidence map provides readers with the opportunity to explore the characteristics of the included studies in detail.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This systematic review provides GPs, policymakers, and researchers with a hierarchical model of information and educational needs for GPs, and an evidence map showing gaps in the current literature. Information needs about clinical guidelines and reasons for referral to specialised care overlapped with needs for more specific information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e749-e757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11388096/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2023.0531\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2023.0531","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大多数 2 型糖尿病患者都在基层医疗机构接受治疗,而全科医生并非糖尿病专科医生。因此,了解全科医生对 2 型糖尿病最基本的信息需求非常重要。目的:确定全科医生对 2 型糖尿病相关信息的需求:设计与环境:系统回顾西方国家的相关文献:我们检索了从开始到 2024 年 1 月的 MEDLINE、Embase、PsycInfo 和 CINAHL 数据库。两名研究人员进行了筛选,并进行了引文检索,以确定数据库检索遗漏的任何相关文章。质量评估采用混合方法评估工具(Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool)进行。对意义单元进行单独编码、分类,然后使用叙述性综合法在这些类别的范围内对研究进行总结。还绘制了证据地图,以突出研究空白:纳入的 39 项研究揭示了信息需求的 8 个主要类别和 37 个子类别。这些类别被组织成一个全面的信息需求层次模型,表明 "指南知识 "和 "转诊原因 "包含了更具体的信息需求。证据地图显示了管理和风险因素定性研究中的类别和知识差距的地理分布:本系统综述为全科医生、政策制定者和研究人员提供了全科医生信息和教育需求的层次模型,以及显示当前文献差距的证据地图。关于临床指南和转诊至专科护理的原因的信息需求与对更具体信息的需求重叠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Information needs for GPs on type 2 diabetes in Western countries: a systematic review.

Background: Most people with type 2 diabetes receive treatment in primary care by GPs who are not specialised in diabetes. Thus, it is important to uncover the most essential information needs regarding type 2 diabetes in general practice.

Aim: To identify information needs related to type 2 diabetes for GPs.

Design and setting: Systematic review focused on literature relating to Western countries.

Method: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from inception to January 2024. Two researchers conducted the selection process, and citation searches were performed to identify any relevant articles missed by the database search. Quality appraisal was conducted with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Meaning units were coded individually, grouped into categories, and then studies were summarised within the context of these categories using narrative synthesis. An evidence map was created to highlight research gaps.

Results: Thirty-nine included studies revealed eight main categories and 36 subcategories of information needs. Categories were organised into a comprehensive hierarchical model of information needs, suggesting 'Knowledge of guidelines' and 'Reasons for referral' as general information needs alongside more specific needs on 'Medication', 'Management', 'Complications', 'Diagnosis', 'Risk factors', and 'Screening for diabetes'. The evidence map provides readers with the opportunity to explore the characteristics of the included studies in detail.

Conclusion: This systematic review provides GPs, policymakers, and researchers with a hierarchical model of information and educational needs for GPs, and an evidence map showing gaps in the current literature. Information needs about clinical guidelines and reasons for referral to specialised care overlapped with needs for more specific information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Supporting patients to use online services in general practice: focused ethnographic case study. Future Health Today: A pragmatic cluster randomised trial of quality improvement activities in general practice for patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer. Lived experiences of end-of-life care at home in the UK: a scoping review of qualitative research. What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Relationship between research activity and the performance of English general practices: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses.
×
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