Limits...
Improving bone mineral density reporting to patients with an illustration of personal fracture risk.

Edmonds SW, Cram P, Lu X, Roblin DW, Wright NC, Saag KG, Solimeo SL, PAADRN Investigato - BMC Med Inform Decis Mak (2014)

Bottom Line: Of the four risk depictions, a plurality of participants (37%) listed a bar graph as most preferred.The majority of subjects (52%) rated the pictogram as the most difficult to understand as this format does not allow people to quickly ascertain their individual risk category.Communicating risk to patients with illustrations can be done effectively with clearly designed illustrations responsive to patient preference.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of General Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA. stephanie-edmonds@uiowa.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: To determine patients' preferences for, and understanding of, FRAX® fracture risk conveyed through illustrations.

Methods: Drawing on examples from published studies, four illustrations of fracture risk were designed and tested for patient preference, ease of understanding, and perceived risk. We enrolled a convenience sample of adults aged 50 and older at two medical clinics located in the Midwestern and Southern United States. In-person structured interviews were conducted to elicit patient ranking of preference, ease of understanding, and perceived risk for each illustration.

Results: Most subjects (n = 142) were female (64%), Caucasian (76%) and college educated (78%). Of the four risk depictions, a plurality of participants (37%) listed a bar graph as most preferred. Subjects felt this illustration used the stoplight color system to display risk levels well and was the most "clear," "clean," and "easy to read". The majority of subjects (52%) rated the pictogram as the most difficult to understand as this format does not allow people to quickly ascertain their individual risk category.

Conclusions: Communicating risk to patients with illustrations can be done effectively with clearly designed illustrations responsive to patient preference.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01507662.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Bar.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4260260&req=5

Fig3: Bar.

Mentions: We initially developed three illustrations, FACES, ARROW, and BAR, with each illustration depicting identical FRAX® results (i.e., a 10-year fracture risk of 21%) to conduct face validity evaluation. FACES (Figure 1) is a pictogram comprised of 100 faces. In our example, 79 were smiling and 21 were colored red and frowning, depicting a 21% risk. ARROW (Figure 2) is informed by the work of Hill, et al [24], and is a horizontally oriented arrow-shaped, directional graph that integrates a red, yellow, and green colored “stoplight” system to indicate risk: Low risk is associated with green, moderate is associated with yellow, and high risk is associated with red shading of equal widths. The BAR illustration (Figure 3), is informed by the work of Price et al., and employed a graduated stoplight color system, but is oriented vertically, similar to thermometer tools [32].Figure 1


Improving bone mineral density reporting to patients with an illustration of personal fracture risk.

Edmonds SW, Cram P, Lu X, Roblin DW, Wright NC, Saag KG, Solimeo SL, PAADRN Investigato - BMC Med Inform Decis Mak (2014)

Bar.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4260260&req=5

Fig3: Bar.
Mentions: We initially developed three illustrations, FACES, ARROW, and BAR, with each illustration depicting identical FRAX® results (i.e., a 10-year fracture risk of 21%) to conduct face validity evaluation. FACES (Figure 1) is a pictogram comprised of 100 faces. In our example, 79 were smiling and 21 were colored red and frowning, depicting a 21% risk. ARROW (Figure 2) is informed by the work of Hill, et al [24], and is a horizontally oriented arrow-shaped, directional graph that integrates a red, yellow, and green colored “stoplight” system to indicate risk: Low risk is associated with green, moderate is associated with yellow, and high risk is associated with red shading of equal widths. The BAR illustration (Figure 3), is informed by the work of Price et al., and employed a graduated stoplight color system, but is oriented vertically, similar to thermometer tools [32].Figure 1

Bottom Line: Of the four risk depictions, a plurality of participants (37%) listed a bar graph as most preferred.The majority of subjects (52%) rated the pictogram as the most difficult to understand as this format does not allow people to quickly ascertain their individual risk category.Communicating risk to patients with illustrations can be done effectively with clearly designed illustrations responsive to patient preference.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of General Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA. stephanie-edmonds@uiowa.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: To determine patients' preferences for, and understanding of, FRAX® fracture risk conveyed through illustrations.

Methods: Drawing on examples from published studies, four illustrations of fracture risk were designed and tested for patient preference, ease of understanding, and perceived risk. We enrolled a convenience sample of adults aged 50 and older at two medical clinics located in the Midwestern and Southern United States. In-person structured interviews were conducted to elicit patient ranking of preference, ease of understanding, and perceived risk for each illustration.

Results: Most subjects (n = 142) were female (64%), Caucasian (76%) and college educated (78%). Of the four risk depictions, a plurality of participants (37%) listed a bar graph as most preferred. Subjects felt this illustration used the stoplight color system to display risk levels well and was the most "clear," "clean," and "easy to read". The majority of subjects (52%) rated the pictogram as the most difficult to understand as this format does not allow people to quickly ascertain their individual risk category.

Conclusions: Communicating risk to patients with illustrations can be done effectively with clearly designed illustrations responsive to patient preference.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01507662.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus