首页> 外文期刊>Journal of medical Internet research >Cool but Counterproductive: Interactive, Web-Based Risk Communications Can Backfire
【24h】

Cool but Counterproductive: Interactive, Web-Based Risk Communications Can Backfire

机译:冷静但适得其反:基于Web的交互式风险沟通可能适得其反

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Paper-based patient decision aids generally present risk information using numbers and/or static images. However, limited psychological research has suggested that when people interactively graph risk information, they process the statistics more actively, making the information more available for decision making. Such interactive tools could potentially be incorporated in a new generation of Web-based decision aids.Objective: The objective of our study was to investigate whether interactive graphics detailing the risk of side effects of two treatments improve knowledge and decision making over standard risk graphics.Methods: A total of 3371 members of a demographically diverse Internet panel viewed a hypothetical scenario about two hypothetical treatments for thyroid cancer. Each treatment had a chance of causing 1 of 2 side effects, but we randomly varied whether one treatment was better on both dimensions (strong dominance condition), slightly better on only one dimension (mild dominance condition), or better on one dimension but worse on the other (trade-off condition) than the other treatment. We also varied whether respondents passively viewed the risk information in static pictograph (icon array) images or actively manipulated the information by using interactive Flash-based animations of “fill-in-the-blank” pictographs. Our primary hypothesis was that active manipulation would increase respondents’ ability to recognize dominance (when available) and choose the better treatment.Results: The interactive risk graphic conditions had significantly worse survey completion rates (1110/1695, 65.5% vs 1316/1659, 79.3%, P < .001) than the static image conditions. In addition, respondents using interactive graphs were less likely to recognize and select the dominant treatment option (234/380, 61.6% vs 343/465, 73.8%, P < .001 in the strong dominance condition). Conclusions: Interactivity, however visually appealing, can both add to respondent burden and distract people from understanding relevant statistical information. Decision-aid developers need to be aware that interactive risk presentations may create worse outcomes than presentations of static risk graphic formats.
机译:背景:基于纸质的患者决策辅助工具通常使用数字和/或静态图像来呈现风险信息。但是,有限的心理学研究表明,当人们交互式地绘制风险信息图时,他们会更加积极地处理统计信息,从而使信息更易于决策。此类交互工具可能会集成到新一代基于Web的决策辅助工具中。目的:我们的研究目的是调查详细描述两种疗法副作用风险的交互图形是否比标准风险图形提高了知识和决策能力。方法:人口统计学上多元化的互联网小组的3371名成员查看了关于两种假设的甲状腺癌治疗方法的假设情景。每种疗法都有可能导致2种副作用中的一种,但是我们随机地选择一种疗法在两个维度上都更好(强优势条件),在一个维度上稍好(轻度优势条件),或者在一个维度上更好,但更糟在另一个(权衡条件)而不是其他处理上。我们还改变了受访者是被动地查看静态象形图(图标阵列)图像中的风险信息,还是通过使用基于Flash的交互式“空白”象形图动画来积极地操纵风险信息。我们的主要假设是,主动操作会增强受访者的优势(如果有的话)并选择更好的治疗方法。结果:交互式风险图形条件的调查完成率显着降低(1110 / 1695,65.5%vs 1316/1659,比静态图像条件高79.3%,P <.001)。此外,使用交互式图表的受访者不太可能识别和选择主要的治疗选择(234 / 380,61.6%vs 343 / 465,73.8%,在强优势条件下P <.001)。结论:交互性,无论在视觉上如何吸引人,都可能增加受访者的负担,并分散人们对相关统计信息的理解。决策辅助开发人员需要意识到,交互式风险演示文稿可能会比静态风险图形格式的演示文稿产生更糟糕的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号