Suppr超能文献

在他莫昔芬预防决策辅助工具中传达副作用风险:象形图的去偏影响。

Communicating side effect risks in a tamoxifen prophylaxis decision aid: the debiasing influence of pictographs.

作者信息

Zikmund-Fisher Brian J, Ubel Peter A, Smith Dylan M, Derry Holly A, McClure Jennifer B, Stark Azadeh, Pitsch Rosemarie K, Fagerlin Angela

机构信息

VA Health Services Research & Development Center of Excellence, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

出版信息

Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Nov;73(2):209-14. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.05.010.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To experimentally test whether using pictographs (image matrices), incremental risk formats, and varied risk denominators would influence perceptions and comprehension of side effect risks in an online decision aid about prophylactic use of tamoxifen to prevent primary breast cancers.

METHODS

We recruited 631 women with elevated breast cancer risk from two healthcare organizations. Participants saw tailored estimates of the risks of 5 side effects: endometrial cancer, blood clotting, cataracts, hormonal symptoms, and sexual problems. Presentation format was randomly varied in a three factor design: (A) risk information was displayed either in pictographs or numeric text; (B) presentations either reported total risks with and without tamoxifen or highlighted the incremental risk most relevant for decision making; and (C) risk estimates used 100 or 1000 person denominators. Primary outcome measures included risk perceptions and gist knowledge.

RESULTS

Incremental risk formats consistently lowered perceived risk of side effects but resulted in low knowledge when displayed by numeric text only. Adding pictographs, however, produced significantly higher comprehension levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Pictographs make risk statistics easier to interpret, reducing biases associated with incremental risk presentations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Including graphs in risk communications is essential to support an informed treatment decision-making process.

摘要

目的

通过实验测试在关于使用他莫昔芬预防原发性乳腺癌的在线决策辅助工具中,使用象形图(图像矩阵)、增量风险格式和不同的风险分母是否会影响对副作用风险的认知和理解。

方法

我们从两个医疗保健机构招募了631名乳腺癌风险升高的女性。参与者看到了5种副作用风险的定制估计:子宫内膜癌、血液凝固、白内障、激素症状和性问题。呈现格式在三因素设计中随机变化:(A)风险信息以象形图或数字文本显示;(B)呈现方式要么报告使用和不使用他莫昔芬的总风险,要么突出与决策最相关的增量风险;(C)风险估计使用100或1000人的分母。主要结局指标包括风险认知和要点知识。

结果

增量风险格式始终降低了对副作用风险的感知,但仅以数字文本显示时导致知识水平较低。然而,添加象形图产生了显著更高的理解水平。

结论

象形图使风险统计更容易解释,减少了与增量风险呈现相关的偏差。

实践意义

在风险沟通中纳入图表对于支持明智的治疗决策过程至关重要。

相似文献

1
2
Women's decisions regarding tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention: responses to a tailored decision aid.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Feb;119(3):613-20. doi: 10.1007/s10549-009-0618-4.
3
A demonstration of ''less can be more'' in risk graphics.
Med Decis Making. 2010 Nov-Dec;30(6):661-71. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10364244. Epub 2010 Apr 7.
4
Testing whether decision aids introduce cognitive biases: results of a randomized trial.
Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Aug;80(2):158-63. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.021. Epub 2009 Dec 9.
6
The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices.
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):448-55. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023. Epub 2008 Aug 27.
7
Results from a randomized trial of a web-based, tailored decision aid for women at high risk for breast cancer.
Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Jun;91(3):364-71. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.12.014. Epub 2013 Feb 8.
8
The impact of numeracy on verbatim knowledge of the longitudinal risk for prostate cancer recurrence following radiation therapy.
Med Decis Making. 2015 Jan;35(1):27-36. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14551639. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
9
Does Animation Improve Comprehension of Risk Information in Patients with Low Health Literacy? A Randomized Trial.
Med Decis Making. 2020 Jan;40(1):17-28. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19890296. Epub 2019 Dec 3.
10
Evaluation of risk communication in a mammography patient decision aid.
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Jul;99(7):1240-1248. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.02.013. Epub 2016 Feb 26.

引用本文的文献

1
How Difference Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format, Part 2: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.
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.
MDM Policy Pract. 2025 Feb 24;10(1):23814683241255334. doi: 10.1177/23814683241255334. eCollection 2025 Jan-Jun.
3
How Point (Single-Probability) Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format, Part 2: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.
MDM Policy Pract. 2025 Feb 24;10(1):23814683241255337. doi: 10.1177/23814683241255337. eCollection 2025 Jan-Jun.
4
Communicating cancer treatment with pictogram-based timeline visualizations.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2025 Mar 1;32(3):480-491. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocae319.
5
Debiasing Judgements Using a Distributed Cognition Approach: A Scoping Review of Technological Strategies.
Hum Factors. 2025 Jun;67(6):525-545. doi: 10.1177/00187208241292897. Epub 2024 Oct 26.
7
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 29;1(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6.
8
Statistical Literacy in Hand and Upper-Extremity Patients.
J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2023 Aug 25;5(6):793-798. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2023.07.009. eCollection 2023 Nov.

本文引用的文献

2
Making numbers matter: present and future research in risk communication.
Am J Health Behav. 2007 Sep-Oct;31 Suppl 1:S47-56. doi: 10.5555/ajhb.2007.31.supp.S47.
4
Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations.
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):663-71. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07303824. Epub 2007 Jul 24.
5
Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):672-80. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
6
Reducing aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions.
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2007 Mar;13(1):11-21. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.13.1.11.
7
Further insight into the perception of quantitative information: judgments of gist in treatment decisions.
Med Decis Making. 2007 Jan-Feb;27(1):34-43. doi: 10.1177/0272989X06297101.
8
Design features of graphs in health risk communication: a systematic review.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Nov-Dec;13(6):608-18. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2115. Epub 2006 Aug 23.
9
Numeracy and decision making.
Psychol Sci. 2006 May;17(5):407-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01720.x.
10
Formats for improving risk communication in medical tradeoff decisions.
J Health Commun. 2006 Mar;11(2):167-82. doi: 10.1080/10810730500526695.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验