Literature DB >> 12757530

Evaluation of a visual risk communication tool: effects on knowledge and perception of blood transfusion risk.

D H Lee1, M D Mehta.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Effective risk communication in transfusion medicine is important for health-care consumers, but understanding the numerical magnitude of risks can be difficult. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a visual risk communication tool on the knowledge and perception of transfusion risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Laypeople were randomly assigned to receive transfusion risk information with either a written or a visual presentation format for communicating and comparing the probabilities of transfusion risks relative to other hazards. Knowledge of transfusion risk was ascertained with a multiple-choice quiz and risk perception was ascertained by psychometric scaling and principal components analysis.
RESULTS: Two-hundred subjects were recruited and randomly assigned. Risk communication with both written and visual presentation formats increased knowledge of transfusion risk and decreased the perceived dread and severity of transfusion risk. Neither format changed the perceived knowledge and control of transfusion risk, nor the perceived benefit of transfusion. No differences in knowledge or risk perception outcomes were detected between the groups randomly assigned to written or visual presentation formats.
CONCLUSION: Risk communication that incorporates risk comparisons in either written or visual presentation formats can improve knowledge and reduce the perception of transfusion risk in laypeople.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12757530     DOI: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2003.00402.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfusion        ISSN: 0041-1132            Impact factor:   3.157


  6 in total

1.  How well do commonly used data presentation formats support comparative effectiveness evaluations?

Authors:  James G Dolan; Feng Qian; Peter J Veazie
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 2.  Design features of graphs in health risk communication: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jessica S Ancker; Yalini Senathirajah; Rita Kukafka; Justin B Starren
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2006-08-23       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Ten most important accomplishments in risk analysis, 1980-2010.

Authors:  Michael Greenberg; Charles Haas; Anthony Cox; Karen Lowrie; Katherine McComas; Warner North
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.000

4.  How should risk be communicated to children: a cross-sectional study comparing different formats of probability information.

Authors:  Fiona Ulph; Ellen Townsend; Cris Glazebrook
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-06-05       Impact factor: 2.796

Review 5.  What do we know about communicating risk? A brief review and suggestion for contextualising serious, but rare, risk, and the example of cox-2 selective and non-selective NSAIDs.

Authors:  R Andrew Moore; Sheena Derry; Henry J McQuay; John Paling
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2008-02-07       Impact factor: 5.156

6.  Risk perception of blood transfusions - a comparison of patients and allied healthcare professionals.

Authors:  Jan A Graw; Katja Eymann; Felix Kork; Martin Zoremba; Rene Burchard
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 2.655

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.