• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

识别患者对传达风险评估结果的偏好:一项描述性试点研究。

Identifying patient preferences for communicating risk estimates: a descriptive pilot study.

作者信息

Fortin J M, Hirota L K, Bond B E, O'Connor A M, Col N F

机构信息

Decision Systems Group, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

出版信息

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2001;1:2. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-1-2. Epub 2001 Aug 1.

DOI:10.1186/1472-6947-1-2
PMID:11545684
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC55342/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients increasingly seek more active involvement in health care decisions, but little is known about how to communicate complex risk information to patients. The objective of this study was to elicit patient preferences for the presentation and framing of complex risk information.

METHOD

To accomplish this, eight focus group discussions and 15 one-on-one interviews were conducted, where women were presented with risk data in a variety of different graphical formats, metrics, and time horizons. Risk data were based on a hypothetical woman's risk for coronary heart disease, hip fracture, and breast cancer, with and without hormone replacement therapy. Participants' preferences were assessed using likert scales, ranking, and abstractions of focus group discussions.

RESULTS

Forty peri- and postmenopausal women were recruited through hospital fliers (n = 25) and a community health fair (n = 15). Mean age was 51 years, 50% were non-Caucasian, and all had completed high school. Bar graphs were preferred by 83% of participants over line graphs, thermometer graphs, 100 representative faces, and survival curves. Lifetime risk estimates were preferred over 10 or 20-year horizons, and absolute risks were preferred over relative risks and number needed to treat.

CONCLUSION

Although there are many different formats for presenting and framing risk information, simple bar charts depicting absolute lifetime risk were rated and ranked highest overall for patient preferences for format.

摘要

背景

患者越来越希望更积极地参与医疗保健决策,但对于如何向患者传达复杂的风险信息却知之甚少。本研究的目的是了解患者对复杂风险信息呈现方式和框架的偏好。

方法

为实现这一目标,进行了八次焦点小组讨论和十五次一对一访谈,向女性展示了各种不同图形格式、指标和时间范围的风险数据。风险数据基于一名假设女性患冠心病、髋部骨折和乳腺癌的风险,包括使用和不使用激素替代疗法的情况。使用李克特量表、排序以及焦点小组讨论的摘要来评估参与者的偏好。

结果

通过医院传单(n = 25)和社区健康博览会(n = 15)招募了40名围绝经期和绝经后女性。平均年龄为51岁,50%为非白种人,且均完成了高中学业。83%的参与者更喜欢柱状图,而不是折线图、温度计图、100张代表性面孔和生存曲线。与10年或20年的时间范围相比,参与者更喜欢终身风险估计,与相对风险和治疗所需人数相比,更喜欢绝对风险。

结论

尽管有许多不同的风险信息呈现方式和框架,但对于患者对格式的偏好而言,描绘绝对终身风险的简单柱状图总体评分和排名最高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/628d527e836c/1472-6947-1-2-5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/d3d98b44d73b/1472-6947-1-2-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/855259c956b3/1472-6947-1-2-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/4f1ce1b08d09/1472-6947-1-2-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/c124ee497b04/1472-6947-1-2-4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/628d527e836c/1472-6947-1-2-5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/d3d98b44d73b/1472-6947-1-2-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/855259c956b3/1472-6947-1-2-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/4f1ce1b08d09/1472-6947-1-2-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/c124ee497b04/1472-6947-1-2-4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c099/55342/628d527e836c/1472-6947-1-2-5.jpg

相似文献

1
Identifying patient preferences for communicating risk estimates: a descriptive pilot study.识别患者对传达风险评估结果的偏好:一项描述性试点研究。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2001;1:2. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-1-2. Epub 2001 Aug 1.
2
Presenting risk information to people with diabetes: evaluating effects and preferences for different formats by a web-based randomised controlled trial.向糖尿病患者提供风险信息:通过一项基于网络的随机对照试验评估不同形式的效果和偏好。
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Nov;63(3):336-49. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.12.016. Epub 2006 Jul 24.
3
Cancer patients' preferences for communicating clinical trial quality of life information: a qualitative study.癌症患者对交流临床试验生活质量信息的偏好:一项定性研究。
Qual Life Res. 2003 Jun;12(4):395-404. doi: 10.1023/a:1023404731041.
4
Risk communication formats for low probability events: an exploratory study of patient preferences.低概率事件的风险沟通形式:患者偏好的探索性研究
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008 Apr 10;8:14. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-14.
5
Absolute risk representation in cardiovascular disease prevention: comprehension and preferences of health care consumers and general practitioners involved in a focus group study.心血管疾病预防中的绝对风险表示:参与焦点小组研究的医疗保健消费者和全科医生的理解和偏好。
BMC Public Health. 2010 Mar 4;10:108. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-108.
6
Communicating evidence for participatory decision making.为参与式决策提供证据
JAMA. 2004 May 19;291(19):2359-66. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.19.2359.
7
Communicating risk information: the influence of graphical display format on quantitative information perception-Accuracy, comprehension and preferences.传达风险信息:图形显示格式对定量信息感知的影响——准确性、理解与偏好
Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Dec;69(1-3):121-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.08.006. Epub 2007 Oct 1.
8
Tailoring risk communication to improve comprehension: Do patient preferences help or hurt?定制风险沟通以提高理解:患者偏好是有帮助还是有损害?
Health Psychol. 2016 Sep;35(9):1007-16. doi: 10.1037/hea0000367. Epub 2016 May 16.
9
The influence of graphic display format on the interpretations of quantitative risk information among adults with lower education and literacy: a randomized experimental study.图形显示格式对受教育程度和读写能力较低的成年人对定量风险信息的解读的影响:一项随机实验研究。
Med Decis Making. 2012 Jul-Aug;32(4):532-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11424926. Epub 2011 Nov 10.
10
Patients' and health professionals' understanding of and preferences for graphical presentation styles for individual-level EORTC QLQ-C30 scores.患者和卫生专业人员对欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织(EORTC)QLQ-C30个体水平评分的图形呈现方式的理解和偏好。
Qual Life Res. 2016 Mar;25(3):595-604. doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1107-3. Epub 2015 Sep 9.

引用本文的文献

1
How Difference Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format, Part 2: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.不同任务如何受到概率格式的影响,第2部分:一项使数字有意义的系统评价。
MDM Policy Pract. 2025 Feb 24;10(1):23814683241310242. doi: 10.1177/23814683241310242. eCollection 2025 Jan-Jun.
2
Scope, Methods, and Overview Findings for the Making Numbers Meaningful Evidence Review of Communicating Probabilities in Health: A Systematic Review.《让数字有意义:健康领域概率沟通的循证综述》的范围、方法及概述性研究结果:一项系统综述
MDM Policy Pract. 2025 Feb 24;10(1):23814683241255334. doi: 10.1177/23814683241255334. eCollection 2025 Jan-Jun.
3

本文引用的文献

1
The visual communication of risk.风险的视觉传达。
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999(25):149-63. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a024191.
2
Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions.用于治疗决策的定量信息认知。
Med Decis Making. 2000 Apr-Jun;20(2):228-38. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0002000208.
3
Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising and the public.直接面向消费者的处方药广告与公众。
Development and evaluation of patient-centred polygenic risk score reports for glaucoma screening.
用于青光眼筛查的以患者为中心的多基因风险评分报告的开发与评估。
BMC Med Genomics. 2025 Jan 30;18(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12920-024-02079-z.
4
Future Burden of Ischemic Stroke in Australia: Impact on Health Outcomes between 2019 and 2038.澳大利亚缺血性中风的未来负担:2019年至2038年对健康结果的影响
Neuroepidemiology. 2024;58(6):449-459. doi: 10.1159/000538800. Epub 2024 Apr 10.
5
Future burden of myocardial infarction in Australia: impact on health outcomes between 2019 and 2038.澳大利亚心肌梗死的未来负担:2019年至2038年对健康结果的影响
Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2024 Aug 8;10(5):421-430. doi: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcad062.
6
Strategies for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and the population: a scoping review.向管理人员和公众传达医疗保健科学证据的策略:范围综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jul 10;21(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01017-2.
7
Effect of different visual presentations on the public's comprehension of prognostic information using acute and chronic condition scenarios: two online randomised controlled trials.不同视觉呈现方式对公众理解急性和慢性疾病预后信息的影响:两项在线随机对照试验。
BMJ Open. 2023 Jun 14;13(6):e067624. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067624.
8
A tool to help patients visualize ASCVD risk and the potential impact of risk-lowering interventions.一种帮助患者直观了解动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(ASCVD)风险以及降低风险干预措施潜在影响的工具。
Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev. 2022 Nov 19;15:200159. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcrp.2022.200159. eCollection 2022 Dec.
9
Investigating the presentation of uncertainty in an icon array: A randomized trial.探究图标阵列中不确定性的呈现方式:一项随机试验。
PEC Innov. 2022 Dec;1:None. doi: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2021.100003.
10
American Heart Association's Life's Simple 7: Lifestyle Recommendations, Polygenic Risk, and Lifetime Risk of Coronary Heart Disease.美国心脏协会的生命简单 7 项:生活方式建议、多基因风险和冠心病终生风险。
Circulation. 2022 Mar 15;145(11):808-818. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.053730. Epub 2022 Jan 31.
J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Nov;14(11):651-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.01049.x.
4
The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians.信息框架对医生行为的影响。
J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Oct;14(10):633-42. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.09038.x.
5
Effects of information framing on the intentions of family physicians to prescribe long-term hormone replacement therapy.信息框架对家庭医生开具长期激素替代疗法处方意图的影响。
J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Oct;14(10):591-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.09028.x.
6
Use of meta-analytic results to facilitate shared decision making.利用荟萃分析结果促进共同决策。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1999 Sep-Oct;6(5):412-9. doi: 10.1136/jamia.1999.0060412.
7
Women's perceptions of breast cancer risk: how you ask matters.女性对乳腺癌风险的认知:提问方式很重要。
Med Decis Making. 1999 Jul-Sep;19(3):221-9. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9901900301.
8
A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation.为绝经后考虑激素治疗的女性提供的决策辅助工具:决策支持框架与评估
Patient Educ Couns. 1998 Mar;33(3):267-79. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(98)00026-3.
9
Randomized trial of estrogen plus progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS) Research Group.雌激素加孕激素用于绝经后妇女冠心病二级预防的随机试验。心脏与雌激素/孕激素替代研究(HERS)研究组
JAMA. 1998 Aug 19;280(7):605-13. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.7.605.
10
Hormone replacement therapy.激素替代疗法
BMJ. 1998 Aug 15;317(7156):457-61. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7156.457.