Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Language, Literature and Communication, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Health Expect. 2017 Oct;20(5):973-983. doi: 10.1111/hex.12538. Epub 2017 Jan 17.
Disease risk calculators are increasingly web-based, but previous studies have shown that risk information often poses problems for lay users.
To examine how lay people understand the result derived from an online cardiometabolic risk calculator.
A qualitative study was performed, using the risk calculator in the Dutch National Prevention Program for cardiometabolic diseases. The study consisted of three parts: (i) attention: completion of the risk calculator while an eye tracker registered eye movements; (ii) recall: completion of a recall task; and (iii) interpretation: participation in a semi-structured interview.
We recruited people from the target population through an advertisement in a local newspaper; 16 people participated in the study, which took place in our university laboratory.
Eye-tracking data showed that participants looked most extensively at numerical risk information. Percentages were recalled well, whereas natural frequencies and verbal labels were remembered less well. Five qualitative themes were derived from the interview data: (i) numerical information does not really sink in; (ii) the verbal categorical label made no real impact on people; (iii) people relied heavily on existing knowledge and beliefs; (iv) people zoomed in on risk factors, especially family history of diseases; and (v) people often compared their situation to that of their peers.
Although people paid attention to and recalled the risk information to a certain extent, they seemed to have difficulty in properly using this information for interpreting their risk.
疾病风险计算器越来越多地基于网络,但之前的研究表明,风险信息常常给非专业用户带来问题。
研究非专业人士如何理解在线心血代谢风险计算器得出的结果。
采用荷兰国家心血代谢疾病预防计划中的风险计算器进行定性研究。研究包括三个部分:(i)注意:在眼动追踪器记录眼球运动的同时完成风险计算器;(ii)回忆:完成回忆任务;(iii)解释:参加半结构化访谈。
我们通过当地报纸上的一则广告从目标人群中招募参与者;共有 16 人参与了这项在我们大学实验室进行的研究。
眼动追踪数据显示,参与者最广泛地关注数值风险信息。百分比被很好地回忆起来,而自然频率和口头标签则被记得较差。从访谈数据中得出了五个定性主题:(i)数值信息并没有真正被理解;(ii)口头分类标签对人们没有真正的影响;(iii)人们严重依赖现有知识和信仰;(iv)人们专注于风险因素,尤其是疾病家族史;(v)人们经常将自己的情况与同龄人进行比较。
尽管人们在一定程度上关注并回忆了风险信息,但他们似乎难以正确地使用这些信息来解释自己的风险。