Efficacy of Three Numerical Presentation Formats on Lay People’s Comprehension and Risk Perception of Fact Boxes—A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Author:

Aubertin Pascal1,Frese Thomas2,Kasper Jürgen3,Mau Wilfried4,Meyer Gabriele1,Mikolajczyk Rafael5ORCID,Richter Matthias6,Schildmann Jan7,Steckelberg Anke1

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Health and Nursing Science, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

2. Institute of General Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

3. Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, 0176 Oslo, Norway

4. Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

5. Institute of Medical Epidemiology, Biometrics and Informatics, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

6. Institute of Medical Sociology, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

7. Institute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany

Abstract

(1) Background: Fact boxes present the benefits and harms of medical interventions in the form of tables. Some studies suggest that people with a lower level of education could profit more from graphic presentations. The objective of the study was to compare three different formats in fact boxes with regard to verbatim and gist knowledge in general and according to the educational background. (2) Methods: In May 2020, recruitment started for this randomized controlled trial. Participants were given one out of three presentation formats: natural frequencies, percentages, and graphic. We used Limesurvey® to assess comprehension/risk perception as the primary outcome. The Kruskal–Wallis test and the Mann–Whitney U test were used in addition to descriptive analyses. (3) Results: A total of 227 people took part in the study. Results of the groups were nearly identical in relation to the primary outcome verbatim knowledge, likewise in gist knowledge. However, participants with lower educational qualifications differed from participants with higher educational qualifications in terms of verbatim knowledge in the group percentages. (4) Conclusions: The results indicate that all three forms of presentation are suitable for conveying the content. Further research should take the individual preferences regarding the format into account.

Funder

Open Access Publication Fund of the Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Reference34 articles.

1. How evidence-based are print-and online mass media in Austria? A quantitative analysis;Kerschner;Z. Evidenz Fortbild. Qual. Gesundh.,2015

2. Mühlhauser, I., Albrecht, M., and Steckelberg, A. (2015). Evidence-based health information and risk competence. GMS Ger. Med. Sci., 13.

3. Bundesgesetzblatt (2013). Patients’ Rights Act, Bundesanzeiger.

4. Lühnen, J., Albrecht, M., Mühlhauser, I., and Steckelberg, A. (2019, August 15). Guideline Evidence-Based Health Information. Hamburg 2017. Available online: https://www.leitlinie-gesundheitsinformation.de/?lang=en.

5. Hinneburg, J., Wilhelm, C., and Ellermann, C. (2022, December 23). Methodenpapier für Die Entwicklung von Faktenboxen. Potsdam: Harding-Zentrum für Risikokompetenz. Available online: https://www.hardingcenter.de/sites/default/files/2021-06/Methodenpapier%20des%20Harding-Zentrums_DE_20210616_final_0.pdf.

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