Literature DB >> 17905553

Communicating risk information: the influence of graphical display format on quantitative information perception-Accuracy, comprehension and preferences.

Melanie Price1, Rachel Cameron, Phyllis Butow.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Statistical health risk information has proved notoriously confusing and difficult to understand. While past research indicates that presenting risk information in a frequency format is superior to relative risk and probability formats, the optimal characteristics of frequency formats are still unclear. The aim of this study is to determine the features of 1000 person frequency diagrams (pictographs) which result in the greatest speed and accuracy of graphical perception.
METHODS: Participants estimated the difference in chance of survival when taking or not taking Drug A, on a pictograph format, varying by mode (one-graph/two-graph), direction (vertical/horizontal), and shading (shaded/unshaded), and their preferences for the different formats. Their understanding of different components of the 1000 person diagram was assessed. Responses were timed and scored for accuracy.
RESULTS: Horizontal pictographs were perceived faster and more accurately than vertical formats. Two-graph pictographs were perceived faster than one-graph formats. Shading reduced response time in two-graph formats, but increased response times in one-graph formats. Shaded and one-graph pictographs were preferred.
CONCLUSIONS: As shading and one-graph formats were preferred, further clarification as to why shading negatively impacts on response times in the one-graph format is warranted. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Horizontal pictographs are optimal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17905553     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.08.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  34 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

2.  The effect of format on parents' understanding of the risks and benefits of clinical research: a comparison between text, tables, and graphics.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2010-07

3.  'I'll do what they did": social norm information and cancer treatment decisions.

Authors:  Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Paul D Windschitl; Nicole Exe; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-03-01

4.  Using animated computer-generated text and graphics to depict the risks and benefits of medical treatment.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Colleen Brennan-Martinez; Maureen McGonegal; Robert Levine
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 4.965

5.  The impact of numeracy on verbatim knowledge of the longitudinal risk for prostate cancer recurrence following radiation therapy.

Authors:  Daniel A Hamstra; Skyler B Johnson; Stephanie Daignault; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Jeremy M G Taylor; Knoll Larkin; Alexander Wood; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  A demonstration of ''less can be more'' in risk graphics.

Authors:  Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 2.583

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.  The effect of different cardiovascular risk presentation formats on intentions, understanding and emotional affect: a randomised controlled trial using a web-based risk formatter (protocol).

Authors:  Cherry-Ann Waldron; John Gallacher; Trudy van der Weijden; Robert Newcombe; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Informing the uninformed: optimizing the consent message using a fractional factorial design.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Vijayan N Nair; Naveen N Narisetty; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 16.193

10.  Communicating study results to our patients: which way is best?

Authors:  B A Petrisor; Paul Tornetta
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.