A systematic review of measurement uncertainty visualizations in the context of standardized assessments

Author:

Heltne Aleksander12ORCID,Frans Niek3ORCID,Hummelen Benjamin1ORCID,Falkum Erik2ORCID,Germans Selvik Sara45ORCID,Paap Muirne C. S.16ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Research and Innovation, Clinic for Mental Health and Addiction Oslo University Hospital Oslo Norway

2. Institute of Clinical Medicine University of Oslo Oslo Norway

3. Department of Inclusive and Special Needs Education, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands

4. Department of Psychiatry, Helse Nord‐Trønderlag Namsos Hospital Namsos Norway

5. Department of Mental Health Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Trondheim Norway

6. Department of Child and Family Welfare, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands

Abstract

This systematic review summarized findings of 29 studies evaluating visual presentation formats appropriate for communicating measurement uncertainty associated with standardized clinical assessment instruments. Studies were identified through systematic searches of multiple databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, ERIC, Scopus, and Web of Science). Strikingly, we found no studies which were conducted using samples of clinicians and included clinical decision‐making scenarios. Included studies did however find that providing participants with information about measurement uncertainty may increase awareness of uncertainty and promote more optimal decision making. Formats which visualize the shape of the underlying probability distribution were found to promote more accurate probability estimation and appropriate interpretations of the underlying probability distribution shape. However, participants in the included studies did not seem to benefit from the additional information provided by such plots during decision‐making tasks. Further explorations into how presentations of measurement uncertainty impact clinical decision making are needed to examine whether findings of the included studies generalize to clinician populations. This review provides an important overview of pitfalls associated with formats commonly used to communicate measurement uncertainty in clinical assessment instruments, and a potential starting point for further explorations into promising alternatives. Finally, our review offers specific recommendations on how remaining research questions might be addressed.

Funder

Norges Forskningsråd

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Psychology,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,General Medicine

Reference62 articles.

1. Task complexity affects information seeking and use

2. Confidence Intervals for True Scores: Is There a Correct Approach?

3. Meaning of Reliability in Terms of Correct and Incorrect Clinical Decisions: The Art of Decision Making is Still Alive

4. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2018).CASP qualitative studies Checklist. Retrieved May 10 2021 fromhttps://casp‐uk.b‐cdn.net/wp‐content/uploads/2018/03/CASP‐Qualitative‐Checklist‐2018_fillable_form.pdf.

5. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2020).CASP randomised controlled trial standard Checklist. Retrieved May 10 2021 fromhttps://casp‐uk.b‐cdn.net/wp‐content/uploads/2020/10/CASP_RCT_Checklist_PDF_Fillable_Form.pdf.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3