OBJECTIVES: To assess whether risk-communication interventions are associated with changes in patient knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, and to identify aspects of these interventions that modify these effects. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: 96 studies from the period 1985-1996 retrieved by electronic searching of eight databases, hand searching of four journals, contacting key authors, and reference list searching. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The effect size of the principal outcome was identified from each study. Outcomes measuring behavioral change were preferred; if these were not available, knowledge, anxiety, or risk perceptions were used, according to the focus of the study. Data were available to calculate the principal effect sizes for 82 of the studies. ANALYSIS: Meta-regression. RESULTS: The methodologic qualities of the studies varied. Nevertheless, risk-communication interventions generally had positive (beneficial) effects. Interventions addressing treatment choices were associated with larger effects than were those in other contexts, such as prevention or screening. Interventions using individual risk estimates were associated with larger effects than were those using more general risk information. Two design variables were identified as effect modifiers: randomized controlled trials were associated with smaller effects than other designs, and dichotomous outcomes were associated with larger effects than continuous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Risk communication interventions may be most productive if they include individual risk estimates in the discussion between professional and patient. Patient decisions about treatment appear more amenable to change by these interventions than attendance for screening or modification of risky behavior.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether risk-communication interventions are associated with changes in patient knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, and to identify aspects of these interventions that modify these effects. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: 96 studies from the period 1985-1996 retrieved by electronic searching of eight databases, hand searching of four journals, contacting key authors, and reference list searching. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The effect size of the principal outcome was identified from each study. Outcomes measuring behavioral change were preferred; if these were not available, knowledge, anxiety, or risk perceptions were used, according to the focus of the study. Data were available to calculate the principal effect sizes for 82 of the studies. ANALYSIS: Meta-regression. RESULTS: The methodologic qualities of the studies varied. Nevertheless, risk-communication interventions generally had positive (beneficial) effects. Interventions addressing treatment choices were associated with larger effects than were those in other contexts, such as prevention or screening. Interventions using individual risk estimates were associated with larger effects than were those using more general risk information. Two design variables were identified as effect modifiers: randomized controlled trials were associated with smaller effects than other designs, and dichotomous outcomes were associated with larger effects than continuous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Risk communication interventions may be most productive if they include individual risk estimates in the discussion between professional and patient. Patient decisions about treatment appear more amenable to change by these interventions than attendance for screening or modification of risky behavior.
Authors: Paul K J Han; Christine W Duarte; Susannah Daggett; Andrea Siewers; Bill Killam; Kahsi A Smith; Andrew N Freedman Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2015-07-19