Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Wiley full text link Wiley Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

Share

.2016 Mar;94(1):51-76.
doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12181.

Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Guidelines for and Against Clinical Preventive Services: Results from a National Survey

Affiliations

Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Guidelines for and Against Clinical Preventive Services: Results from a National Survey

Paula M Lantz et al. Milbank Q.2016 Mar.

Abstract

Policy points: Both the underuse and overuse of clinical preventive services relative to evidence-based guidelines are a public health concern. Informed consumers are an important foundation of many components of the Affordable Care Act, including coverage mandates for proven clinical preventive services recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Across sociodemographic groups, however, knowledge of and positive attitudes toward evidence-based guidelines for preventive care are extremely low. Given the demonstrated low levels of consumers' knowledge of and trust in guidelines, coupled with their strong preference for involvement in preventive care decisions, better education and decision-making support for evidence-based preventive services are greatly needed.

Context: Both the underuse and overuse of clinical preventive services are a serious public health problem. The goal of our study was to produce population-based national data that could assist in the design of communication strategies to increase knowledge of and positive attitudes toward evidence-based guidelines for clinical preventive services (including the US Preventive Services Task Force, USPSTF) and to reduce uncertainty among patients when guidelines change or are controversial.

Methods: In late 2013 we implemented an Internet-based survey of a nationally representative sample of 2,529 adults via KnowledgePanel, a probability-based survey panel of approximately 60,000 adults, statistically representative of the US noninstitutionalized population. African Americans, Hispanics, and those with less than a high school education were oversampled. We then conducted descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify the prevalence of and sociodemographic characteristics associated with key knowledge and attitudinal variables.

Findings: While 36.4% of adults reported knowing that the Affordable Care Act requires insurance companies to cover proven preventive services without cost sharing, only 7.7% had heard of the USPSTF. Approximately 1 in 3 (32.6%) reported trusting that a government task force would make fair guidelines for preventive services, and 38.2% believed that the government uses guidelines to ration health care. Most of the respondents endorsed the notion that research/scientific evidence and expert medical opinion are important for the creation of guidelines and that clinicians should follow guidelines based on evidence. But when presented with patient vignettes in which a physician made a guideline-based recommendation against a cancer-screening test, less than 10% believed that this recommendation alone, without further dialogue and/or the patient's own research, was sufficient to make such a decision.

Conclusions: Given these demonstrated low levels of knowledge and mistrust regarding guidelines, coupled with a strong preference for shared decision making, better consumer education and decision supports for evidence-based guidelines for clinical preventive services are greatly needed.

Keywords: clinical preventive services; evidence-based guidelines; patient engagement; survey research.

© 2016 Milbank Memorial Fund.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Wennberg JE. Unwarranted variations in healthcare delivery: implications for academic medical centres. BMJ. 2002a;325:961‐964. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Koh HK, Sebelius KG. Promising prevention through the Affordable Care Act. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363:1296‐1299. - PubMed
    1. Carman KL, Mauer M, Yegian JM, et al. Evidence that consumers are skeptical about evidence‐based health care. Health Aff. 2010;29(7):1400‐1406. - PubMed
    1. Bensing J. Bridging the gap: the separate worlds of evidence‐based medicine and patient‐centered medicine. Patient Educ Counseling. 2000;39(1):17‐25. - PubMed
    1. Santa JS. Communicating information about “what not to do” to consumers. BMC Med Inform Decis Making. 2013;13(Suppl. 3):S2. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Wiley full text link Wiley Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp