Jasmir G Nayak1, Andrea L Hartzler2, Liam C Macleod3, Jason P Izard4, Bruce M Dalkin3, John L Gore3. 1. Departments of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA. Electronic address: jnayak@uw.edu. 2. Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, USA. 3. Departments of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA. 4. Department of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the literacy skill sets of patients in the context of graphical interpretation of interactive dashboards. METHODS: We assessed literacy characteristics of prostate cancer patients and assessed comprehension of quality of life dashboards. Health literacy, numeracy and graph literacy were assessed with validated tools. We divided patients into low vs. high numeracy and graph literacy. We report descriptive statistics on literacy, dashboard comprehension, and relationships between groups. We used correlation and multiple linear regressions to examine factors associated with dashboard comprehension. RESULTS: Despite high health literacy in educated patients (78% college educated), there was variation in numeracy and graph literacy. Numeracy and graph literacy scores were correlated (r=0.37). In those with low literacy, graph literacy scores most strongly correlated with dashboard comprehension (r=0.59-0.90). On multivariate analysis, graph literacy was independently associated with dashboard comprehension, adjusting for age, education, and numeracy level. CONCLUSIONS: Even among higher educated patients; variation in the ability to comprehend graphs exists. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians must be aware of these differential proficiencies when counseling patients. Tools for patient-centered communication that employ visual displays need to account for literacy capabilities to ensure that patients can effectively engage these resources.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the literacy skill sets of patients in the context of graphical interpretation of interactive dashboards. METHODS: We assessed literacy characteristics of prostate cancerpatients and assessed comprehension of quality of life dashboards. Health literacy, numeracy and graph literacy were assessed with validated tools. We divided patients into low vs. high numeracy and graph literacy. We report descriptive statistics on literacy, dashboard comprehension, and relationships between groups. We used correlation and multiple linear regressions to examine factors associated with dashboard comprehension. RESULTS: Despite high health literacy in educated patients (78% college educated), there was variation in numeracy and graph literacy. Numeracy and graph literacy scores were correlated (r=0.37). In those with low literacy, graph literacy scores most strongly correlated with dashboard comprehension (r=0.59-0.90). On multivariate analysis, graph literacy was independently associated with dashboard comprehension, adjusting for age, education, and numeracy level. CONCLUSIONS: Even among higher educated patients; variation in the ability to comprehend graphs exists. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians must be aware of these differential proficiencies when counseling patients. Tools for patient-centered communication that employ visual displays need to account for literacy capabilities to ensure that patients can effectively engage these resources.
Authors: Allison P Pack; Carol E Golin; Lauren M Hill; Jessica Carda-Auten; Deshira D Wallace; Sruthi Cherkur; Claire E Farel; Elias P Rosen; Monica Gandhi; Heather M Asher Prince; Angela D M Kashuba Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2019-01-02
Authors: Lauren E Snyder; Daniel F Phan; Kristen C Williams; Eduardo Piqueiras; Sarah E Connor; Sheba George; Lorna Kwan; Jefersson Villatoro Chavez; Megha D Tandel; Stanley K Frencher; Mark S Litwin; John L Gore; Andrea L Hartzler Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-10-07 Impact factor: 7.942
Authors: Jessica Schroeder; Jane Hoffswell; Chia-Fang Chung; James Fogarty; Sean Munson; Jasmine Zia Journal: CSCW Conf Comput Support Coop Work Date: 2017-02-25
Authors: Peter H Schwartz; Kieran C O'Doherty; Colene Bentley; Karen K Schmidt; Michael M Burgess Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2021-04-05 Impact factor: 2.583