Literature DB >> 10772360

Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions.

D Feldman-Stewart1, N Kocovski, B A McConnell, M D Brundage, W J Mackillop.   

Abstract

The study was designed to determine which formats for displaying quantities, such as probabilities of treatment risks and benefits, are perceived most accurately and easily by patients. Accuracy and speed of processing were compared for six different presentation formats: pie charts, vertical bars, horizontal bars, numbers, systematic ovals, and random ovals. Quantities were used in two tasks: a choice task that required larger/smaller judgments and an estimate task that required more precise evaluation. The impacts of blue-yellow color and of a treatment-decision context on performance in the two tasks were also investigated. The study included four experiments. Taken together the results suggest that the formats best for making a choice differ from those best for estimating the size of an amount. For making a choice, vertical bars, horizontal bars, numbers, and systematic ovals were equally well perceived; pie charts and random ovals caused slower and less accurate performances. For estimating, numbers led to the most accurate estimates, followed by systematic ovals. The other four formats led to the least accurate estimates. Color and context did not alter which formats were best.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10772360     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0002000208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  54 in total

1.  Consumers' use of HCAHPS ratings and word-of-mouth in hospital choice.

Authors:  John W Huppertz; Jay P Carlson
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  Patterns of reporting health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized clinical trials: implications for clinicians and quality of life researchers.

Authors:  Michael Brundage; Brenda Bass; Judith Davidson; John Queenan; Andrea Bezjak; Jolie Ringash; Anna Wilkinson; Deb Feldman-Stewart
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-11-26       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Involving patients in cardiovascular risk management with nurse-led clinics: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marije S Koelewijn-van Loon; Trudy van der Weijden; Ben van Steenkiste; Gaby Ronda; Bjorn Winkens; Johan L Severens; Michel Wensing; Glyn Elwyn; Richard Grol
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Striking a balance in communicating pharmacogenetic test results: promoting comprehension and minimizing adverse psychological and behavioral response.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga; Rachel Mills; Hayden Bosworth
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2014-06-21

5.  Effect of arrangement of stick figures on estimates of proportion in risk graphics.

Authors:  Jessica S Ancker; Elke U Weber; Rita Kukafka
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  A randomized comparison of patients' understanding of number needed to treat and other common risk reduction formats.

Authors:  Stacey L Sheridan; Michael P Pignone; Carmen L Lewis
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Improving informed consent: pilot of a decision aid for women invited to participate in a breast cancer prevention trial (IBIS-II DCIS).

Authors:  I Juraskova; P Butow; A Lopez; M Seccombe; A Coates; F Boyle; N McCarthy; L Reaby; J F Forbes
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Health providers' perceptions of novel approaches to visualizing integrated health information.

Authors:  T Le; B Reeder; H Thompson; G Demiris
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 2.176

Review 9.  Clinical implications of numeracy: theory and practice.

Authors:  Wendy Nelson; Valerie F Reyna; Angela Fagerlin; Isaac Lipkus; Ellen Peters
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2008-08-02

10.  The effect of alternative graphical displays used to present the benefits of antibiotics for sore throat on decisions about whether to seek treatment: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Cheryl L L Carling; Doris Tove Kristoffersen; Signe Flottorp; Atle Fretheim; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Elie A Akl; Jeph Herrin; Thomas D MacKenzie; Victor M Montori
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.