期刊文章%@ 14388871 % JMIR出版公司，wiki和协同卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析写作在医疗保健中的应用:范围综述%A Archambault,Patrick M %A van de Belt,Tom H %A Grajales III,Francisco J %A Faber,Marjan J %A Kuziemsky,Craig E %A Gagnon,Susie %A Bilodeau,Andrea %A Rioux,Simon %A Nelen,Willianne LDM %A Gagnon,Marie-Pierre %A Turgeon,Alexis F %A Aubin,Karine %A Gold,Irving %A Poitras,Julien %A Eysenbach,Gunther %A Kremer,Jan AM %A Légaré，法国%+研究中心医院affilié universitaire de Lévis，santé阿尔丰斯-德雅尔丁社会服务中心(affilié universitaire de Lévis)，伍尔夫街143号，Lévis, QC, G6V 3Z1，加拿大，1 418 835 7121 ext 3905，patrick.m.archambault@gmail.com %K协同写作应用程序%K协同创作%K知识管理%K众包%K医疗信息学%K电子健康%K互联网%K Wiki %K维基%K谷歌文档%K谷歌Knol %K Web 2.0 %K知识翻译%K证据医学%K参与式医学%D 2013 %7 08.10.2013 %9综述%J J医学互联网Res %G英语%X背景:协作写作应用程序(如wiki和谷歌文档)具有改善公共卫生和卫生保健领域证据使用的潜力。它们的使用迅速增加，因此有必要系统地综合它们作为知识转化工具在卫生保健部门的影响的证据，并对影响它们使用的因素进行盘点。目的:通过Levac六阶段方法，进行范围审查，以探索关于在医疗保健中有效、安全、合乎道德地使用wiki和协作写作应用程序(CWAs)的证据的深度和广度。方法:采用多种策略进行研究定位。从2001年到2011年9月16日，我们查询了7个科学数据库和6个灰色文献来源，查询了维基和CWAs上发表的文章。共筛选引文4436篇，灰色文献1921篇。 Two reviewers independently reviewed citations, selected eligible studies, and extracted data using a standardized form. We included any paper presenting qualitative or quantitative empirical evidence concerning health care and CWAs. We defined a CWA as any technology that enables the joint and simultaneous editing of a webpage or an online document by many end users. We performed qualitative content analysis to identify the factors that affect the use of CWAs using the Gagnon framework and their effects on health care using the Donabedian framework. Results: Of the 111 studies included, 4 were experimental, 5 quasi-experimental, 5 observational, 52 case studies, 23 surveys about wiki use, and 22 descriptive studies about the quality of information in wikis. We classified them by theme: patterns of use of CWAs (n=26), quality of information in existing CWAs (n=25), and CWAs as KT tools (n=73). A high prevalence of CWA use (ie, more than 50%) is reported in 58% (7/12) of surveys conducted with health care professionals and students. However, we found only one longitudinal study showing that CWA use is increasing in health care. Moreover, contribution rates remain low and the quality of information contained in different CWAs needs improvement. We identified 48 barriers and 91 facilitators in 4 major themes (factors related to the CWA, users’ knowledge and attitude towards CWAs, human environment, and organizational environment). We also found 57 positive and 23 negative effects that we classified into processes and outcomes. Conclusions: Although we found some experimental and quasi-experimental studies of the effectiveness and safety of CWAs as educational and KT interventions, the vast majority of included studies were observational case studies about CWAs being used by health professionals and patients. More primary research is needed to find ways to address the different barriers to their use and to make these applications more useful for different stakeholders. %M 24103318 %R 10.2196/jmir.2787 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2013/10/e210/ %U https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2787 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24103318