Literature DB >> 16929039

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

Jessica S Ancker1, Yalini Senathirajah, Rita Kukafka, Justin B Starren.   

Abstract

This review describes recent experimental and focus group research on graphics as a method of communication about quantitative health risks. Some of the studies discussed in this review assessed effect of graphs on quantitative reasoning, others assessed effects on behavior or behavioral intentions, and still others assessed viewers' likes and dislikes. Graphical features that improve the accuracy of quantitative reasoning appear to differ from the features most likely to alter behavior or intentions. For example, graphs that make part-to-whole relationships available visually may help people attend to the relationship between the numerator (the number of people affected by a hazard) and the denominator (the entire population at risk), whereas graphs that show only the numerator appear to inflate the perceived risk and may induce risk-averse behavior. Viewers often preferred design features such as visual simplicity and familiarity that were not associated with accurate quantitative judgments. Communicators should not assume that all graphics are more intuitive than text; many of the studies found that patients' interpretations of the graphics were dependent upon expertise or instruction. Potentially useful directions for continuing research include interactions with educational level and numeracy and successful ways to communicate uncertainty about risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16929039      PMCID: PMC1656964          DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  56 in total

Review 1.  Treating people with information: an analysis and review of approaches to communicating health risk information.

Authors:  A J Rothman; M T Kiviniemi
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1999

Review 2.  Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures.

Authors:  Adrian Edwards; Glyn Elwyn; Al Mulley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-04-06

3.  How informed is consent? Understanding of pictorial and verbal probability information by medical inpatients.

Authors:  R Fuller; N Dudley; J Blacktop
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.401

4.  Effect of framing as gain versus loss on understanding and hypothetical treatment choices: survival and mortality curves.

Authors:  Katrina Armstrong; J Sanford Schwartz; Genevieve Fitzgerald; Mary Putt; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Achieving involvement: process outcomes from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; K Hood; M Robling; C Atwell; I Russell; M Wensing; R Grol
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.267

6.  Agreement between scales in the measurement of breast cancer risk perceptions.

Authors:  Marilyn M Schapira; Susan L Davids; Timothy L McAuliffe; Ann B Nattinger
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.000

7.  Patients' and physicians' interpretations of graphic data displays.

Authors:  D J Mazur; D H Hickam
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1993 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  Visual illusions created by survival curves and the need to avoid potential misinterpretation.

Authors:  Ernest W Lau; G A Ng
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Five-year survival curves: how much data are enough for patient-physician decision making in general surgery?

Authors:  D J Mazur; D H Hickam
Journal:  Eur J Surg       Date:  1996-02

10.  Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness?

Authors:  C D Naylor; E Chen; B Strauss
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1992-12-01       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  126 in total

1.  Visual presentations of efficacy data in direct-to-consumer prescription drug print and television advertisements: A randomized study.

Authors:  Helen W Sullivan; Amie C O'Donoghue; Kathryn J Aikin; Dhuly Chowdhury; Rebecca R Moultrie; Douglas J Rupert
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2015-12-22

Review 2.  Rethinking health numeracy: a multidisciplinary literature review.

Authors:  Jessica S Ancker; David Kaufman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  A combined qualitative method for testing an interactive risk communication tool.

Authors:  Jessica S Ancker; Rita Kukafka
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2007-10-11

Review 4.  Assessing patient preferences for treatment options and process of care in inflammatory bowel disease: a critical review of quantitative data.

Authors:  Meenakshi Bewtra; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 5.  Suitable trial designs and cohorts for preventive breast cancer agents.

Authors:  Kathrin Strasser-Weippl; Paul E Goss
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Supporting shared decision making within the MobiGuide project.

Authors:  Silvana Quaglini; Yuval Shahar; Mor Peleg; Silvia Miksch; Carlo Napolitano; Mercedes Rigla; Angels Pallàs; Enea Parimbelli; Lucia Sacchi
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2013-11-16

7.  An information-centric framework for designing patient-centered medical decision aids and risk communication.

Authors:  Lyndsey Franklin; Catherine Plaisant; Ben Shneiderman
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2013-11-16

8.  Parental numeracy and asthma exacerbations in Puerto Rican children.

Authors:  Christian Rosas-Salazar; Sima K Ramratnam; John M Brehm; Yueh-Ying Han; Edna Acosta-Pérez; María Alvarez; Angel Colón-Semidey; Glorisa Canino; Andrea J Apter; Juan C Celedón
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 9.410

9.  The influence of environmental hazard maps on risk beliefs, emotion, and health-related behavioral intentions.

Authors:  Dolores J Severtson
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 2.228

10.  Assessment and improvement of figures to visually convey benefit and risk of stroke thrombolysis.

Authors:  Jigneshkumar Gadhia; Sidney Starkman; Bruce Ovbiagele; Latisha Ali; David Liebeskind; Jeffrey L Saver
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 7.914

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.