Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2026
[Construction of an evaluation indicator system for standardized prevention and control of type 1 diabetes mellitus].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zeng Hanyue, Zhou Mengna, Li Zhisheng, Deng Chao, Xie Yuting, Yan Junxia, Li Xia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) has become one of the major public health challenges in China. This study aims to construct an evaluation indicator system applicable to the standardized prevention and control work of T1DM demonstration management centers, so as to provide a scientific basis for evaluation and strategy optimization of prevention and control practices.
METHODS: Based on the structure-process-outcome (S-P-O) model as the theoretical framework, a preliminary pool of evaluation indicators was established. The indicators were revised through the expert consultation method to form a preliminary draft of the evaluation indicator system. Subsequently, an expert consensus meeting was conducted using the nominal group technique (NGT) to determine the final evaluation indicator system. The analytic hierarchy process combined with expert scoring method was used to calculate the weight of each indicator.
RESULTS: The positive response rate of experts participating in the consensus meeting was 100%, and the authority coefficient was 0.925. The Kendall's W coefficients for the importance, rationality, and accessibility of the indicators were 0.146 (P>0.05), 0.197 (P<0.05), and 0.319 (P<0.05), respectively. The final evaluation indicator system consisted of 3 first-level indicators, 15 second-level indicators, and 41 third-level indicators. Results of the analytic hierarchy process showed that the consistency ratios of all judgment matrices were <0.1, and the Kendall's W coefficient of the expert scoring method was 0.242 (P<0.05). The weights of the first-level indicators "structure" "process" and "outcome" were 0.287 7, 0.317 7, and 0.394 6, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation indicator system for standardized prevention and control of T1DM can not only effectively evaluate the implementation of standardized prevention and control work in demonstration management centers, but also provide clear guidance for continuous improvement. This indicator system may be further optimized and refined in future practical applications.
METHODS: Based on the structure-process-outcome (S-P-O) model as the theoretical framework, a preliminary pool of evaluation indicators was established. The indicators were revised through the expert consultation method to form a preliminary draft of the evaluation indicator system. Subsequently, an expert consensus meeting was conducted using the nominal group technique (NGT) to determine the final evaluation indicator system. The analytic hierarchy process combined with expert scoring method was used to calculate the weight of each indicator.
RESULTS: The positive response rate of experts participating in the consensus meeting was 100%, and the authority coefficient was 0.925. The Kendall's W coefficients for the importance, rationality, and accessibility of the indicators were 0.146 (P>0.05), 0.197 (P<0.05), and 0.319 (P<0.05), respectively. The final evaluation indicator system consisted of 3 first-level indicators, 15 second-level indicators, and 41 third-level indicators. Results of the analytic hierarchy process showed that the consistency ratios of all judgment matrices were <0.1, and the Kendall's W coefficient of the expert scoring method was 0.242 (P<0.05). The weights of the first-level indicators "structure" "process" and "outcome" were 0.287 7, 0.317 7, and 0.394 6, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation indicator system for standardized prevention and control of T1DM can not only effectively evaluate the implementation of standardized prevention and control work in demonstration management centers, but also provide clear guidance for continuous improvement. This indicator system may be further optimized and refined in future practical applications.