Harding Center for Risk Literacy, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Med Decis Making. 2019 Jan;39(1):41-56. doi: 10.1177/0272989X18818166.
Fact boxes employ evidence-based guidelines on risk communication to present benefits and harms of health interventions in a balanced and transparent format. However, little is known about their short- and long-term efficacy and whether designing fact boxes to present multiple outcomes with icon arrays would increase their efficacy.
In study 1, 120 men (30-75 y) completed a lab study. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 fact box formats on prostate cancer screening: a tabular fact box with numbers, a fact box with numbers and icon array, and a fact box with numbers, separate icon arrays, and text to describe each benefit and harm. Comprehension of information (while materials were present) and short-term knowledge recall were assessed. Study 2 recruited an online sample of 244 German men (40-75 y). Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 fact box formats or widely distributed health information, and knowledge was assessed at baseline, shortly after presentation, and at 6-mo follow-up, along with comprehension while materials were present.
In both studies, comprehension and knowledge-recall scores were similar when comparing tabular and icon fact boxes. In the 6-mo follow-up, this positive effect on knowledge recall disappeared. Fact boxes increased knowledge relative to baseline but did not affect decision intentions or perceptions of having complete information to make decisions.
This study shows that fact boxes with and without icon arrays are equally effective at improving comprehension and knowledge recall over the short-term and are simple formats that can improve on current health information. Specifically, if fact boxes are used at the time or immediately before a decision is made, they promote informed decisions about prostate cancer screening.
事实框采用基于证据的风险沟通指南,以平衡和透明的格式呈现健康干预措施的益处和危害。然而,人们对其短期和长期效果知之甚少,也不知道设计带有图标数组的事实框来呈现多个结果是否会提高其效果。
在研究 1 中,120 名男性(30-75 岁)完成了一项实验室研究。参与者被随机分配到前列腺癌筛查的 3 种事实框格式之一:带有数字的表格式事实框、带有数字和图标数组的事实框,以及带有数字、单独的图标数组和文字描述每个益处和危害的事实框。评估信息理解(在材料呈现时)和短期知识回忆。研究 2 在德国招募了 244 名年龄在 40-75 岁之间的在线男性参与者。参与者被随机分配到 3 种事实框格式之一或广泛传播的健康信息中,在基线、呈现后不久和 6 个月随访时评估知识,同时评估材料呈现时的理解情况。
在这两项研究中,当比较表格式和图标式事实框时,理解和知识回忆得分相似。在 6 个月的随访中,这种对知识回忆的积极影响消失了。事实框相对于基线增加了知识,但并没有影响决策意图或对拥有做出决策所需的完整信息的感知。
本研究表明,带有和不带图标数组的事实框在短期内同样有效地提高理解和知识回忆,并且是可以改进当前健康信息的简单格式。具体来说,如果在做出决策时或立即之前使用事实框,它们可以促进对前列腺癌筛查的知情决策。