Suppr超能文献

资料框:什么能通过?一项焦点小组研究。

Fact Boxes: What gets through? A focus group study.

机构信息

Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Faculty of Medicine - Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Halle (Saale), Germany.

Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Faculty of Medicine - Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Halle (Saale), Germany.

出版信息

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2022 Feb;168:96-105. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2021.12.011. Epub 2022 Feb 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The "fact box" format was developed to present the benefits and side effects of medical treatments without distortion and in a comprehensible manner. Few studies were able to show that fact boxes, when compared with other formats, significantly improve risk perception, comprehensibility and readability. The fact boxes available in Germany, however, vary with regard to how tables and accompanying texts are presented. It is unclear to what extent the existing evidence can be applied to these formats. Hardly any fact boxes have been piloted systematically. The aim was to pilot the fact box "Antibiotics for acute bronchitis" as a model for the format in terms of feasibility.

METHOD

We used print and online media to recruit adults (> 18 years). The characteristics gender, age and level of education were considered for sampling. The feasibility was explored by means of a semi-structured interview guideline. The focus group interviews were audio-taped and then transcribed. Data analysis was conducted as content analysis according to Mayring.

RESULTS

Five focus groups with a total of 28 participants took place between April 2018 and May 2019 (Halle/Saale, Saxony-Anhalt: n=3; St. Ingbert, Saarland: n=1; Trier, Rhineland-Palatinate: n=1). The fact box was piloted in an iterative process; the results were revised accordingly and checked again in focus groups until information saturation was achieved. The analysis identified the following main categories: interpretation of contents, readability, low reliability; credibility, relevance of the information, relevance of the presentation; superfluous information; completeness and layout. Overall, the fact box was hardly understood, especially regarding the numerical presentation given and the technical terms used. Both the objective and the intended addressees of the fact box were not clear. After revision, feasibility was established.

DISCUSSION

The iterative revision process resulted in a final version that was well understood and perceived as a decision aid.

CONCLUSION

The results support the demand of the guideline "Evidence-based Health Information" for piloting evidence-based health information prior to their dissemination and further evaluation. The next step will be to evaluate the fact box format in a randomised controlled trial.

摘要

背景

“事实框”格式的开发旨在以无扭曲且易于理解的方式呈现医疗治疗的益处和副作用。很少有研究能够表明,与其他格式相比,事实框可以显著提高风险感知、理解和可读性。然而,德国现有的事实框在表格和相关文本的呈现方式上存在差异。尚不清楚现有证据在多大程度上适用于这些格式。几乎没有对任何事实框进行系统试点。目的是以该格式的可行性为模型,对“急性支气管炎抗生素”事实框进行试点。

方法

我们使用印刷和在线媒体招募年龄在 18 岁以上的成年人。采样时考虑了性别、年龄和教育水平等特征。通过半结构化访谈指南探索可行性。焦点小组访谈进行了录音,然后进行了转录。数据分析根据 Mayring 进行了内容分析。

结果

2018 年 4 月至 2019 年 5 月期间,共进行了 5 个焦点小组,共有 28 名参与者(哈勒/萨勒,萨克森-安哈特州:n=3;圣英贝特,萨尔州:n=1;特里尔,莱茵兰-普法尔茨州:n=1)。事实框经过迭代试点;根据结果进行了相应的修订,并在焦点小组中再次进行检查,直到达到信息饱和为止。分析确定了以下主要类别:内容解释、可读性、低可靠性;可信度、信息相关性、呈现相关性;多余信息;完整性和布局。总的来说,事实框很难理解,尤其是关于给出的数值呈现和使用的技术术语。事实框的目标对象和预期对象都不明确。修订后,可行性得到了确立。

讨论

迭代修订过程产生了一个最终版本,该版本易于理解,并被视为决策辅助工具。

结论

结果支持“循证健康信息”指南的要求,即在传播和进一步评估之前对基于证据的健康信息进行试点。下一步将是在随机对照试验中评估事实框格式。

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