社区居民心血管疾病发病风险感知量表的系统评价  

Systematic review of cardiovascular disease risk perception scale for community residents

作　　者：袁天漫 贾盈盈 胡欢婷 张玉萍[3] 宋剑平[3] Yuan Tianman;Jia Yingying;Hu Huanting;Zhang Yuping;Song Jianping(School of Nursing,Zhejiang Chinese Medicine University,Hangzhou 310053,China;Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Hangzhou 310058,China;Nursing Department,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Hangzhou 310009,China)

机构地区：[1]浙江中医药大学护理学院,杭州310053 [2]浙江大学医学院,杭州310058 [3]浙江大学医学院附属第二医院护理部,杭州310009

出　　处：《中华现代护理杂志》2023年第32期4384-4389,共6页Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing

基　　金：浙江省卫生健康科技计划青年创新人才项目(2022RC171)。

摘　　要：目的对社区居民心血管疾病发病风险感知量表进行系统评价,为临床医务人员选择高质量的评估工具提供依据。方法检索PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Web of Science、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方数据库、维普数据库中有关社区居民心血管疾病发病风险感知量表的研究,检索时限均为建库至2022年12月10日。2名研究者基于共识选择健康测量工具的标准和改良版GRADE证据质量评级对纳入量表的方法学及测量属性进行独立评价和证据评级,并形成推荐意见。结果共纳入9篇文献,涉及5种量表。所有量表均未评估测量误差、跨文化效度和反应度。4种量表的推荐强度为B,1种为C。结论目前暂无可推荐的量表,建议未来研究以COSMIN指南为指导进一步严格评估现有量表的测量属性或构建新量表,为临床研究提供更高质量的评估工具提供参考。Objective To conduct a systematic review of cardiovascular disease risk perception scale for community residents,so as to provide a basis for clinical medical personnel to choose high-quality assessment tools.Methods PubMed,Embase,CINAHL,Web of Science,China Biology Medicine disc,CNKI,Wanfang Data and VIP were searched for studies on cardiovascular disease risk perception scales for community residents from the establishment of the databases to December 10,2022.Based on the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments(COSMIN)and the modified version of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment,Development and Evaluation(GRADE),two researchers independently evaluated the methodological and measurement properties of the included scales,scoring evidence and forming recommendations.Results A total of 9 literatures were included,involving 5 scales.None of the scales were assessed for measurement error,cross-cultural validity and responsiveness.The recommendation strength of four scales was class B,and one was class C.Conclusions There is no recommended scale at present.It is suggested that future studies should take COSMIN guidelines as a guide to further strictly evaluate the measurement attributes of existing scales or construct new scales,so as to provide references for clinical research to provide higher quality assessment tools.

关 键 词：社区 心血管疾病 风险感知 量表 系统评价 

分 类 号：R54[医药卫生—心血管疾病]