Patient comprehension of information for shared treatment decision making: state of the art and future directions

Decision-making for congenital anomalies diagnosed during pregnancy: a narrative review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this narrative review was to assess the limited literature on fetal anomalies diagnosed in the second trimester of pregnancy and parental decision-making and identify sources of information deemed as facilitators and barriers to medical decisions.

METHODS

This was a literature review of source material and information about fetal anomalies diagnosed in the second trimester of pregnancy, decision-making, decision tools or aids, and sources of information for anomalies. The search string used explored related peer-reviewed publications and systematic reviews between 2007 and 2024. We also reviewed references from publications meeting inclusion criteria. The search was conducted between June 2022 and February 2024. Exclusion criteria included conference abstracts, non-peer reviewed literature, and articles not available in English language. A total of 77 publications were identified by searching multiple databases using a predefined search string. The search encompassed full text articles from 2007 to 2024 and 11 full-text publications were ultimately included in the review. A list of 45 co-occurring keywords was generated from the included texts, with each keyword having a minimum of two co-occurrences.

RESULTS

Key themes identified included (1) the role of the clinician and need for development of professional knowledge and empathy surrounding discussion of fetal anomalies with patients; (2) information gathering, with individuals reporting use of multiple strategies to obtain information; while the majority found information satisfying, they preferred more details on diagnosis, long-term outcomes of the fetus/child and management of the pregnancy or termination process; and (3) decision-making, the path and process of how individuals made decisions about the pregnancy including quality of life, future fertility, and seeking other people's experiences.

CONCLUSION

Many factors contribute to an individual's decision-making after a diagnosis of a fetal anomalies diagnosed in the second trimester of pregnancy, ranging from personal beliefs and goals to shared experiences of others and access to care. Understanding how sources of information may be deemed both as facilitators and barriers to different individuals during the decision-making process is important for healthcare providers in order to understand how to most effectively support patients. There is a dearth of information on training healthcare professionals to provide support to patients facing these decisions.

A novel scale for the evaluation of physician drawn medical illustrations

Effective communication is a crucial component of patient-centered care and individuals with low health literacy face significant challenges in managing their health, leading to longer hospital stays and worse outcomes. Visual aids, such as medical illustrations and pictograms, can enhance patient understanding and memory retention; however, there is a lack in the medical field of tools for evaluating and improving a physician's ability to draw clinical illustrations for their patient. This article explores an aesthetic scale created in collaboration between Boston University Medical School and the Boston University Fine-Arts department. The scale scores basic design elements that could reasonably be improved in a clinical setting. A pilot study demonstrated interrater reliability between trained artists scoring images of varying concepts and visual quality with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.95. This scale has potential use in medical visual education and clinical evaluation.

Effects of Physicians' Information Giving on Patient Outcomes: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Providing diagnostic and treatment information to patients is a core clinical skill, but evidence for the effectiveness of different information-giving strategies is inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to investigate the reported effects of empirically tested communication strategies for providing information on patient-related outcomes: information recall and (health-related) behaviors.

METHODS

The databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and relevant bibliographies were systematically searched from the inception to April 24, 2020, without restrictions, for articles testing information-giving strategies for physicians (PROSPERO ID: CRD42019115791). Pairs of independent reviewers identified randomized controlled studies with a low risk of selection bias as from the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. Main outcomes were grouped into patient information recall and behavioral outcomes (e.g., alcohol consumption, weight loss, participation in screening). Due to high heterogeneity in the data on effects of interventions, these outcomes were descriptively reported, together with studies', interventions', and information-giving strategies' characteristics. PRISMA guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Seventeen of 9423 articles were included. Eight studies, reporting 10 interventions, assessed patient information recall: mostly conducted in experimental settings and testing a single information-giving strategy. Four of the ten interventions reported significant increase in recall. Nine studies assessed behavioral outcomes, mostly in real-life clinical settings and testing multiple information-giving strategies simultaneously. The heterogeneity in this group of studies was high. Eight of the nine interventions reported a significant positive effect on objectively and subjectively measured patients' behavioral outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Using specific framing strategies for achieving specific communication goals when providing information to patients appears to have positive effects on information recall and patient health-related behaviors. The heterogeneity observed in this group of studies testifies the need for a more consistent methodological and conceptual agenda when testing medical information-giving strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019115791.

Effect of different visual presentations on the comprehension of prognostic information: a systematic review

Background

Understanding prognostic information can help patients know what may happen to their health over time and make informed decisions. However, communicating prognostic information well can be challenging.

Purpose

To conduct a systematic review to identify and synthesize research that has evaluated visual presentations that communicate quantitative prognostic information to patients or the public.

Data sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (from inception to December 2020), and forward and backward citation search.

Study selection

Two authors independently screened search results and assessed eligibility. To be eligible, studies required a quantitative design and comparison of at least one visual presentation with another presentation of quantitative prognostic information. The primary outcome was comprehension of the presented information. Secondary outcomes were preferences for or satisfaction with the presentations viewed, and behavioral intentions.

Data extraction

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data.

Data synthesis

Eleven studies (all randomized trials) were identified. We grouped studies according to the presentation type evaluated. Bar graph versus pictograph (3 studies): no difference in comprehension between the groups. Survival vs mortality curves (2 studies): no difference in one study; higher comprehension in survival curve group in another study. Tabular format versus pictograph (4 studies): 2 studies reported similar comprehension between groups; 2 found higher comprehension in pictograph groups. Tabular versus free text (3 studies): 2 studies found no difference between groups; 1 found higher comprehension in a tabular group.

Limitations

Heterogeneity in the visual presentations and outcome measures, precluding meta-analysis.

Conclusions

No visual presentation appears to be consistently superior to communicate quantitative prognostic information.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01612-9.

Tested communication strategies for providing information to patients in medical consultations: A scoping review and quality assessment of the literature

OBJECTIVES

To systematize the scientific knowledge of empirically tested strategies for verbally providing medical information in patient-physician consultations.

METHODS

A scoping review searching for terms related to physician, information, oral communication, and controlled study. Four pairs of reviewers screened articles. For each selected study, we assessed the quality and summarized aspects on participants, study, intervention, and outcomes. Information provision strategies were inductively classified by types and main categories.

RESULTS

After screening 9422 articles, 39 were included. The methodological quality was moderate. We identified four differently used categories of strategies for providing information: cognitive aid (n = 13), persuasive (n = 8), relationship- (n = 3), and objectivity-oriented strategies (n = 4); plus, one "mixed" category (n = 11). Strategies were rarely theoretically derived.

CONCLUSIONS

Current research of tested strategies for verbally providing medical information is marked by great heterogeneity in methods and outcomes, and lack of theory-driven approaches. The list of strategies could be used to analyse real life communication.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings may aid the harmonization of future efforts to develop empirically-based information provision strategies to be used in clinical and teaching settings.

Understanding of Health-related Decision-making Terminology Among Cancer Caregivers

Research on understanding health-related decision-making terminology among family caregivers of adults living with advanced cancer is lacking. The purpose of this study was to examine interpretations of the meaning of health-related decision-making terminology such as quality-of-life and end-of-life among caregivers of adults living with advanced cancer as a basis for improved understanding of caregiver decision support needs. Interviews were conducted with a purposive sub-sample of 10 caregivers of adults diagnosed with advanced cancer who completed a longitudinal, descriptive study (NRO14856) of factors influencing cancer care decisions. Audio transcripts were analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods. Caregivers described interpretations of the meaning and process of decision-making and decision-related distress. Caregivers were uncertain about the meaning of end-of-life-related terminology, and a placed high value on quality-of-life and faith/spirituality in the decision-making process. Improvements in information and decision support interventions are needed to better support caregivers and subsequently patients towards informed cancer care decisions.

Providing Balanced Information about Options in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards

BACKGROUND

The objective of this International Patient Decision Aids Standard (IPDAS) review is to update and synthesize theoretical and empirical evidence on how balanced information can be presented and measured in patient decision aids (PtDAs).

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team conducted a scoping review using 2 search strategies in multiple electronic databases evaluating the ways investigators defined and measured the balance of information provided about options in PtDAs. The first strategy combined a search informed by the Cochrane Review of the Effectiveness of Decision Aids with a search on balanced information. The second strategy repeated the search published in the 2013 IPDAS update on balanced presentation.

RESULTS

Of 2450 unique citations reviewed, the full text of 168 articles was screened for eligibility. Sixty-four articles were included in the review, of which 13 provided definitions of balanced presentation, 8 evaluated mechanisms that may introduce bias, and 42 quantitatively measured balanced with methods consistent with the IPDAS criteria in PtDAs. The revised definition of balanced information is, "Objective, complete, salient, transparent, evidence-informed, and unbiased presentation of text and visual information about the condition and all relevant options (with important elements including the features, benefits, harms and procedures of those options) in a way that does not favor one option over another and enables individuals to focus attention on important elements and process this information."

CONCLUSIONS

Developers can increase the balance of information in PtDAs by informing their structure and design elements using the IPDAS checklist. We suggest that new PtDA components pertaining to balance be evaluated for cognitive bias with experimental methods as well by objectively evaluating patients' and content experts' beliefs from multiple perspectives.

And How Would That Make You Feel? How People Expect Nudges to Influence Their Sense of Autonomy

Objective

While nudges are increasingly utilized in public policy settings, their potential threat to autonomous choice is the topic of heated debate. Regardless of the actual effects of nudges on autonomy, the mere perception of nudges as autonomy threatening by the general public or policy makers could negatively influence nudge acceptability. The present online studies examined how people expect (different) nudges to affect their perception of autonomy.

Methods

In the first study (N = 455), participants were presented with a hypothetical choice that employed either a default nudge, direct persuasion, or no persuasion, to steer to the desired choice. The presented influence technique was explained before participants reported their expected autonomy, as well as their expected choice satisfaction. Study 2 (N = 601) involved a replication of Study 1 with an additional social norm nudge condition. In Study 3 (N = 750), the explanation of how choice had been influenced was omitted.

Results

While participants expected the default nudge to violate autonomy (Study 1), they had no such expectations for social norm nudges (Study 2). Omitting the explanation that most people are unaware of nudges influencing their choice, reduced the negative impact of nudges on expected autonomy (Study 3).

Conclusion

Effects of nudges on expectations of autonomy differ by type of nudge. Negative expectations are primarily driven by the explanation that decision makers are often unaware of nudges.

A best-worst scaling survey of medical students' perspective on implementing shared decision-making in China

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to ascertain the importance rankings of factors affecting the implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) in medical students in China and determine whether these factors were consistent across the respondents' individual characteristics.

METHOD

Students studying clinical medicine were recruited from three medical universities in China. A cross-sectional online survey using best-worst object scaling with a balanced incomplete block design was adopted to investigate their preference towards implementing SDM in China. Count analysis, multinomial logit analysis and mixed logit analysis were used to estimate the preference heterogeneity of the SDM factors among respondents.

RESULTS

A total of 574 medical students completed the online survey. The three most important factors for implementing SDM were trust and respect, (providing) high-quality medical information and multi-disciplinary collaboration. The mixed logit regression model identified significant heterogeneity in SDM preferences among respondents, and sub-group analysis showed that some heterogeneities varied in respondents by sex, study programs and their experience of visiting doctors.

CONCLUSION

The importance rankings provide rich information for implementing SDM and facilitate the reform of education in medical schools in China. However, the heterogeneities in SDM preference need further explorations.

The Importance of Health Information on the Internet: How It Saved My Life and How it Can Save Yours

The internet holds the potential promise of improved patient outcomes, especially when one is faced with a critical or life-threatening disease or condition. Appropriate and timely access to health information can support informed negotiation of optimal treatments, optimal management, and expedited recovery, and to an improved outcome for a patient. However, there are many human and technical barriers that may prevent the application of the best possible information for both patient and provider alike, making the patient journey complex and potentially dangerous. In this viewpoint paper, the author (who is also a JMIR editor) reflects on a personal patient journey, where use of the internet facilitated a means of reaching a good patient outcome in the face of a variety of informational and organizational limitations and gaps. This journey illustrates the importance of human-related factors affecting access to health information. The application of a range of internet information resources at critical points can result in a positive patient outcome, as this case illustrates. This paper reflects on how the experience highlights several information needs and concerns. It also highlights the need for improved access to appropriate health information along the patient journey that can support patient and provider joint decision-making. This access to information can make the difference between positive clinical outcomes and death, illustrating how health information on the internet can be both critical and life saving.

Promoting or Undermining Quality Decision Making? A Qualitative Content Analysis of Patient Decision Aids Comparing Surgical and Medication Abortion

OBJECTIVES

To understand, describe, and compare the content of patient decision aids on surgical and medication abortion, including 1) attributes used to describe each method, 2) approaches to clarify patients' values, 3) language used to describe each method, and 4) language used to frame women's decision-making role.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed 49 decision aids identified through a previous systematic review and environmental scan. We used summative content analysis for objectives 1 and 2 and directed content analysis for objectives 3 and 4.

RESULTS

We identified 37 method attributes. Overall, the attributes privileged medical over practical and emotional information. One decision aid included an explicit values clarification approach, and others included implicit approaches, which varied in length, information consistency, and organization. We identified four themes-information consistency, subjective claims, emotive or ambiguous descriptions, and medication abortion as not a real abortion-related to the methods' descriptions. We identified three themes-agency in choice, unclear emphasis on women's preferences, and endorsement of clinic services-related to women's decision-making role. Of the nine tools that listed factors influencing women's decision making, patient preferences was often listed last.

CONCLUSIONS

Early abortion method decision aids presented a broad range of information and typically framed the method choice as the woman's. However, their emphasis on medical attributes, use of inconsistent information, and, at times, biased presentation of methods may undermine quality decision making. We recommend adapting an existing decision aid or designing a novel tool based on the content and language that women find most acceptable.

Using the Health Belief Model to explore why women decide for or against the removal of their ovaries to reduce their risk of developing cancer

BACKGROUND

Women at an increased risk of ovarian cancer often have to decide for or against the surgical removal of their healthy ovaries to reduce their cancer risk. This decision can be extremely difficult. Despite this, there is a lack of guidance on how to best support women in making this decision. Research that is guided by theoretical frameworks is needed to help inform clinical practice. We explored the decision-making process of women who are at an increased risk of developing ovarian cancer and had to decide for or against the removal of their ovaries.

METHODS

A qualitative study of 18 semi-structured interviews with women who have attended a cancer treatment centre or cancer counselling and information service in New South Wales, Australia. Data collection and analysis were informed by the Health Belief Model (HBM). Data was analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The paper describes women's decision making with the help of the four constructs of the HBM: perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers. The more anxious and susceptible women felt about getting ovarian cancer, the more likely they were to have an oophorectomy. Women's anxiety was often fuelled by witnessing family members suffer or die from cancer. Women considered a number of barriers and potential benefits to having the surgery but based their decision on "gut feeling" and experiential factors, rather than statistical risk assessment. Age, menopausal status and family commitments seemed to influence but not determine women's decisions on oophorectomy. Women reported a lack of decision support and appreciated if their doctor explained their treatment choice, provided personalised information, involved their general practitioner in the decision-making process and offered a second consultation to follow-up on any questions women might have.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that deciding on whether to have an oophorectomy is a highly personal decision which can be described with the help of the HBM. The results also highlight the need for tailored decision support which could help improve doctor-patient-communication and patient-centred care related to risk reducing surgery in women at an increased risk of ovarian cancer.

Patient Decision Aids for Prenatal Genetic Testing: Probability, Embodiment, and Problematic Integration

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are documents that attempt to support patient participation in biomedical decision making by discussing information and options. Scholars have called for further elaboration and application of communication theory relating to the construction and uses of PDAs. This article analyzes gateway documents, a genre of PDAs that includes texts from noncommercial websites returned during an initial inquiry for decision-making information. Problematic integration theory informs and extends a meaning of balance in a sample of four PDAs for prenatal genetic testing. The study addresses several communication opportunities, including discussions of benefits, disadvantages, providers' scientific knowledge, and patients' embodied knowledge. The PDA authors' emphases on statistical risk without more inclusive considerations of embodied knowledge highlight a conclusion that the documents in the sample are imbalanced. This research serves to introduce a theoretical communication context for analysis of PDAs that may assist scholars in further contributions to the interdisciplinary field of biomedical communication.

Guidance on how to achieve comprehensible patient information leaflets in four steps

Comprehensible information leaflets can improve a patient's knowledge. However, in clinical studies leaflets are often introduced without meticulously verifying their comprehensibility. In an attempt to provide a feasible guidance on how to design comprehensible leaflets we complied and evaluated an easy-to-use development procedure. In January 2015, a literature search was performed to identify evidence for readily available quality assurance strategies as a starting point for a standardized strategy to develop and validate written patient information. The suggested development strategy is a consecutive four-step procedure that comprised already validated distinct quality assessments: (i) an initial requirement analysis specifying the needs and constraints of the target population and evidence-based preparation of the leaflets, (ii) a readability assessment, (iii) the Suitability Assessment of Materials instrument and (iv) iterative consumer test in the target population. The consecutive combination of pertinent and previously validated quality assessments provides an easy-to-use guidance on how to create comprehensibly written patient information, particularly for small-scale research projects with time and money constraints.

An Exploratory Study of Rape Survivors' Prescription Drug Use As A Means of Coping With Sexual Assault

In this study we examined rape survivors' postassault use of prescription drugs, including sedatives, tranquilizers, and antidepressants. In a community-based sample of 102 sexual assault survivors, 44% had used prescription drugs postrape. Consistent with prior research on alcohol as a postassault coping mechanism, the current study found evidence that some women were “self-medicating.” Fourteen percent of the women who had used prescription drugs postrape did so without a doctor's prescription and 50% obtained them through their physicians without disclosing the assault. Most of these women did not disclose the assault to their physicians because they feared how they would respond. For the remaining 36% of women using prescription drugs, there was evidence of the “medicalization” of rape. These victims disclosed the assaults to their doctors, who in many cases responded by giving them a prescription for medication, which made many of the survivors feel blamed and silenced. Implications for improving health care are discussed.

Does framing of cancer survival affect perceived value of care? A willingness-to-pay survey of US residents

AIMS

To investigate the relationship between the framing of survival gains and the perceived value of cancer care.

METHODS

Through a population-based survey of 2040 US adults, respondents were randomized to one of the two sets of hypothetical scenarios, each of which described the survival benefit for a new treatment as either an increase in median survival time (median survival), or an increase in the probability of survival for a given length of time (landmark survival). Each respondent was presented with two randomly selected scenarios with different prognosis and survival improvements, and asked about their willingness to pay (WTP) for the new treatments.

RESULTS

Predicted WTP increased with survival benefits and respondents' income, regardless of how survival benefits were described. Framing therapeutic benefits as improvements in landmark rather than median time survival increased the proportion of the population willing to pay for that gain by 11-35%, and the mean WTP amount by 42-72% in the scenarios we compared.

CONCLUSION

How survival benefits are described may influence the value people place on cancer care.

Using evidence-based algorithms to improve clinical decision making: the case of a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation

Decision making in health care has evolved substantially over the last century. Up until the late 1970s, medical decision making was predominantly intuitive and anecdotal. It was based on trial and error and involved high levels of problem solving. The 1980s gave way to empirical medicine, which was evidence based probabilistic, and involved pattern recognition and less problem solving. Although this represented a major advance in the quality of medical decision making, limitations existed. The advantages of the gold standard of the randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) are well-known and this technique is irreplaceable in its ability to answer critical clinical questions. However, the RCT does have drawbacks. RCTs are expensive and can only capture a snapshot in time. As treatments change and new technologies emerge, new expensive clinical trials must be undertaken to reevaluate them. Furthermore, in order to best evaluate a single intervention, other factors must be controlled. In addition, the study population may not match that of another organization or provider. Although evidence-based medicine has provided powerful data for clinicians, effectively and efficiently tailoring it to the individual has not yet evolved. We are now in a period of transition from this evidence-based era to one dominated by the personalization and customization of care. It will be fueled by policy decisions to shift financial responsibility to the patient, creating a powerful and sophisticated consumer, unlike any patient we have known before. The challenge will be to apply medical evidence and personal preferences to medical decisions and deliver it efficiently in the increasingly busy clinical setting. In this article, we provide a robust review of the concepts of customized care and some of techniques to deliver it. We will illustrate this through a personalized decision model for the treatment decision after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

Balancing the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids: an updated review

Background

Standards for patient decision aids require that information and options be presented in a balanced manner; this requirement is based on the argument that balanced presentation is essential to foster informed decision making. If information is presented in an incomplete/non-neutral manner, it can stimulate cognitive biases that can unduly affect individuals’ knowledge, perceptions of risks and benefits, and, ultimately, preferences. However, there is little clarity about what constitutes balance, and how it can be determined and enhanced. We conducted a literature review to examine the theoretical and empirical evidence related to balancing the presentation of information and options.

Methods

A literature search related to patient decision aids and balance was conducted on Medline, using MeSH terms and PubMed; this search supplemented the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration’s review of patient decision aids trials. Only English language articles relevant to patient decision making and addressing the balance of information and options were included. All members of the team independently screened clusters of articles; uncertainties were resolved by seeking review by another member. The team then worked in sub-groups to extract and synthesise data on theory, definitions, and evidence reported in these studies.

Results

A total of 40 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six explained the rationale for balancing the presentation of information and options. Twelve defined “balance”; the definition of “balance” that emerged is as follows: “The complete and unbiased presentation of the relevant options and the information about those options—in content and in format—in a way that enables individuals to process this information without bias”. Ten of the 40 articles reported assessing the balance of the relevant decision aid. All 10 did so exclusively from the users’ or patients’ perspective, using a five-point Likert-type scale. Presenting information in a side-by-side display form was associated with more respondents (ranging from 70% to 96%) judging the information as “balanced”.

Conclusion

There is a need for comparative studies investigating different ways to improve and measure balance in the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids.

User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful Summary of Findings tables for Cochrane reviews

OBJECTIVE

To develop a Summary of Findings (SoF) table for use in Cochrane reviews that is understandable and useful for health professionals, acceptable to Cochrane Collaboration stakeholders, and feasible to implement.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We gathered stakeholder feedback on the format and content of an SoF table from an advisory group of more than 50 participants and their constituencies through e-mail consultations. We conducted user tests using a think-aloud protocol method, collecting feedback from 21 health professionals and researchers in Norway and the UK. We analyzed the feedback, defined problem areas, and generated new solutions in brainstorming workshops.

RESULTS

Stakeholders were concerned about precision in the data representation and about production feasibility. User testing revealed unexpected comprehension problems, mainly confusion about what the different numbers referred to (class reference). Resolving the tension between achieving table precision and table simplicity became the main focus of the working group.

CONCLUSION

User testing led to a table more useful and understandable for clinical audiences. We arrived at an SoF table that was acceptable to the stakeholders and in principle feasible to implement technically. Some challenges remain, including presenting continuous outcomes and technical/editorial implementation.

Presenting the results of Cochrane Systematic Reviews to a consumer audience: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To develop and obtain feedback about a summary format for Cochrane reviews that is accessible to a consumer audience, without oversimplification or incorrect presentation.

METHODS

We developed 3 versions of a Plain Language Summary (PLS) format of a Cochrane Systematic Review. Using a semi-structured interview guide we tested these versions among 34 members of the public in Norway, Argentina, Canada, and Australia. The authors analyzed feedback, identified problems, and generated new solutions before retesting to produce a final version of a Plain Language Summary format.

RESULTS

Participants preferred results presented as words, supplemented by numbers in a table. There was a lack of understanding regarding the difference between a review and an individual study, that the effect is rarely an exact number, that evidence can be of low or high quality, and that level of quality is a separate issue from intervention effect. Participants also found it difficult to move between presentations of dichotomous and continuous outcomes. Rephrasing the introduction helped participants grasp the concept of a review. Confidence intervals were largely ignored or misunderstood. Our attempts to explain them were only partially successful. Text modifiers (''probably,'' ''may'') to convey different levels of quality were only partially understood, whereas symbols with explanations were more helpful. Participants often understood individual information elements about effect size and quality of these results, but did not always actively merge these elements.

CONCLUSION

Through testing and iteration the authors identified and addressed several problems, using explanations, rephrasing, and symbols to present scientific concepts. Other problems remain, including how best to present confidence intervals and continuous outcomes. Future research should also test information elements in combination rather than in isolation. The new Plain Language Summary format is being evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

The effect of how outcomes are framed on decisions about whether to take antihypertensive medication: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

We conducted an Internet-based randomized trial comparing three valence framing presentations of the benefits of antihypertensive medication in preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD) for people with newly diagnosed hypertension to determine which framing presentation resulted in choices most consistent with participants' values.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In this second in a series of televised trials in cooperation with the Norwegian Broadcasting Company, adult volunteers rated the relative importance of the consequences of taking antihypertensive medication using visual analogue scales (VAS). Participants viewed information (or no information) to which they were randomized and decided whether or not to take medication. We compared positive framing over 10 years (the number escaping CVD per 1000); negative framing over 10 years (the number that will have CVD) and negative framing per year over 10 years of the effects of antihypertensive medication on the 10-year risk for CVD for a 40 year-old man with newly diagnosed hypertension without other risk factors. Finally, all participants were shown all presentations and detailed patient information about hypertension and were asked to decide again. We calculated a relative importance score (RIS) by subtracting the VAS-scores for the undesirable consequences of antihypertensive medication from the VAS-score for the benefit of CVD risk reduction. We used logistic regression to determine the association between participants' RIS and their choice. 1,528 participants completed the study. The statistically significant differences between the groups in the likelihood of choosing to take antihypertensive medication in relation to different values (RIS) increased as the RIS increased. Positively framed information lead to decisions most consistent with those made by everyone for the second, more fully informed decision. There was a statistically significant decrease in deciding to take antihypertensives on the second decision, both within groups and overall.

CONCLUSIONS

For decisions about taking antihypertensive medication for people with a relatively low baseline risk of CVD (70 per 1000 over 10 years), both positive and negative framing resulted in significantly more people deciding to take medication compared to what participants decided after being shown all three of the presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register ISRCTN 33771631.

Personal experience in doctor and patient decision making: from psychology to medicine

Traditional decision research shows that when people are told the probability of a rare event (e.g. the chance of side effects), they generally treat this event as if it were more likely than its objective probability (overweighting). In contrast, recent studies indicate that when outcomes are experienced firsthand, people tend to underweight the probability of rare events. In this paper, we suggest that the distinction between described and experienced information can play a significant role in shared decision making, and can provide a plausible explanation for some discrepancies between the perspectives of doctors and patients. We highlight some of the advantages and disadvantages of experiential and description-based information, and how knowledge of these might be used to improve risk communication.

The effect of alternative graphical displays used to present the benefits of antibiotics for sore throat on decisions about whether to seek treatment: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

We conducted an Internet-based randomized trial comparing four graphical displays of the benefits of antibiotics for people with sore throat who must decide whether to go to the doctor to seek treatment. Our objective was to determine which display resulted in choices most consistent with participants' values.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This was the first of a series of televised trials undertaken in cooperation with the Norwegian Broadcasting Company. We recruited adult volunteers in Norway through a nationally televised weekly health program. Participants went to our Web site and rated the relative importance of the consequences of treatment using visual analogue scales (VAS). They viewed the graphical display (or no information) to which they were randomized and were asked to decide whether to go to the doctor for an antibiotic prescription. We compared four presentations: face icons (happy/sad) or a bar graph showing the proportion of people with symptoms on day three with and without treatment, a bar graph of the average duration of symptoms, and a bar graph of proportion with symptoms on both days three and seven. Before completing the study, all participants were shown all the displays and detailed patient information about the treatment of sore throat and were asked to decide again. We calculated a relative importance score (RIS) by subtracting the VAS scores for the undesirable consequences of antibiotics from the VAS score for the benefit of symptom relief. We used logistic regression to determine the association between participants' RIS and their choice. 1,760 participants completed the study. There were statistically significant differences in the likelihood of choosing to go to the doctor in relation to different values (RIS). Of the four presentations, the bar graph of duration of symptoms resulted in decisions that were most consistent with the more fully informed second decision. Most participants also preferred this presentation (38%) and found it easiest to understand (37%). Participants shown the other three presentations were more likely to decide to go to the doctor based on their first decision than everyone based on the second decision. Participants preferred the graph using faces the least (14.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

For decisions about going to the doctor to get antibiotics for sore throat, treatment effects presented by a bar graph showing the duration of symptoms helped people make decisions more consistent with their values than treatment effects presented as graphical displays of proportions of people with sore throat following treatment.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ISRCTN58507086.

The effect of alternative summary statistics for communicating risk reduction on decisions about taking statins: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

While different ways of presenting treatment effects can affect health care decisions, little is known about which presentations best help people make decisions consistent with their own values. We compared six summary statistics for communicating coronary heart disease (CHD) risk reduction with statins: relative risk reduction and five absolute summary measures-absolute risk reduction, number needed to treat, event rates, tablets needed to take, and natural frequencies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a randomized trial to determine which presentation resulted in choices most consistent with participants' values. We recruited adult volunteers who participated through an interactive Web site. Participants rated the relative importance of outcomes using visual analogue scales (VAS). We then randomized participants to one of the six summary statistics and asked them to choose whether to take statins based on this information. We calculated a relative importance score (RIS) by subtracting the VAS scores for the downsides of taking statins from the VAS score for CHD. We used logistic regression to determine the association between participants' RIS and their choice. 2,978 participants completed the study. Relative risk reduction resulted in a 21% higher probability of choosing to take statins over all values of RIS compared to the absolute summary statistics. This corresponds to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 5; i.e., for every five participants shown the relative risk reduction one additional participant chose to take statins, compared to the other summary statistics. There were no significant differences among the absolute summary statistics in the association between RIS and participants' decisions whether to take statins. Natural frequencies were best understood (86% reported they understood them well or very well), and participants were most satisfied with this information.

CONCLUSIONS

Presenting the benefits of taking statins as a relative risk reduction increases the likelihood of people accepting treatment compared to presenting absolute summary statistics, independent of the relative importance they attach to the consequences. Natural frequencies may be the most suitable summary statistic for presenting treatment effects, based on self-reported preference, understanding of and satisfaction with the information, and confidence in the decision.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ISRCTN85194921.

What is my cancer risk? How internet-based cancer risk assessment tools communicate individualized risk estimates to the public: content analysis

Background

Internet-based cancer risk assessment tools have the potential to inform the public about cancer risk and promote risk-reducing behaviors. However, poorly communicated information on these websites may result in unintended adverse health outcomes.

Objective

This study examined whether: (1) Internet-based cancer risk assessment tools use risk communication formats that facilitate comprehension and reduce bias (as identified by the empirical literature); (2) the use of these formats varies by website affiliation; and (3) the websites provided information necessary to evaluate the quality of the risk estimate.

Methods

A content analysis of Internet-based cancer risk assessment tools was conducted. The terms calculate cancer risk, cancer risk calculator, estimate cancer risk, assess cancer risk, and cancer risk assessment were searched using three search engines. We identified 47 risk assessment tools and coded each according to standardized criteria. We calculated simple frequencies on all coding categories and performed crosstabulations but did not conduct formal statistical analysis due to small cell sizes.

Results

Use of risk communication formats that facilitate comprehension and reduce bias varied widely (eg, 30% of websites [14/47] provided absolute and comparative risk information but 83% [39/47] provided safety messages). Use of formats that facilitate comprehension varied by website affiliation and communication strategy (eg, only 8.3% [1/12] websites affiliated with the health care industry provided absolute and comparative risk information, but 83% [5/6] of websites affiliated with a governmental organization did so). Only 53% (25/47) of websites provided information about the statistical model or the peer-reviewed literature that was used to calculate the risk estimate.

Conclusion

Internet-based cancer risk assessment tools varied in their use of risk communication formats that facilitate comprehension and reduce bias. Formats that are difficult to understand may cause people to misperceive their cancer risk and consequently take inappropriate action.

Explanations for side effect aversion in preventive medical treatment decisions

OBJECTIVE

Many laypeople demonstrate excessive sensitivity to negative side effects of medical treatments, which may lead them to refuse beneficial therapies. This Internet-based experiment investigated three possible explanations for such "side effect aversion." One was derived from mental accounting, one examined the mere presence of a side effect, and one focused on computational difficulties.

DESIGN

Participants (N = 5,379) were presented with a hypothetical cancer preventive treatment situation that was or was not accompanied by one or two small side effects. The side effects were either beneficial or harmful. In all conditions, the net absolute risk reduction associated with the treatment was 15%.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participants indicated their willingness to accept treatment and their perceptions of the treatment's effects on their overall cancer risk.

RESULTS

Data were consistent only with the "mere presence" explanation of side effect aversion, the idea that side effects act as a strong negative cue that directly affects treatment appraisal. The number of negative side effects did not influence treatment willingness.

CONCLUSION

Side effect aversion is a challenge to informed decision making. Specific mechanisms that produce side effect aversion should be identified.

Gene therapy and informed consent decision making: nursing research directions

Recent gene therapy clinical trials have demonstrated significant promise for treating a number of genetic neuromuscular disorders. Although nurses are experienced in educating patients and families about the benefits and risks of conventional therapeutics, there are significant challenges for guiding patients through the decision-making phase of gene therapy clinical trial participation. The first part of this review provides an overview and update on neuromuscular gene therapy, including viral delivery principles and historical progress. The second part discusses risk/benefit perception of gene therapy and factors affecting the decision making for patients interested in participating in a trial. Future challenges for gene therapy are targeted high-efficiency delivery, and additional research on developing patient-centered decision support interventions.

Mutual influence in shared decision making: a collaborative study of patients and physicians

OBJECTIVE

To explore how patients and physicians describe attitudes and behaviours that facilitate shared decision making. Background Studies have described physician behaviours in shared decision making, explored decision aids for informing patients and queried whether patients and physicians want to share decisions. Little attention has been paid to patients' behaviors that facilitate shared decision making or to the influence of patients and physicians on each other during this process.

METHODS

Qualitative analysis of data from four research work groups, each composed of patients with chronic conditions and primary care physicians.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients and physicians identified six categories of paired physician/patient themes, including act in a relational way; explore/express patient's feelings and preferences; discuss information and options; seek information, support and advice; share control and negotiate a decision; and patients act on their own behalf and physicians act on behalf of the patient. Similar attitudes and behaviours were described for both patients and physicians. Participants described a dynamic process in which patients and physicians influence each other throughout shared decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is unique in that clinicians and patients collaboratively defined and described attitudes and behaviours that facilitate shared decision making and expand previous descriptions, particularly of patient attitudes and behaviours that facilitate shared decision making. Study participants described relational, contextual and affective behaviours and attitudes for both patients and physicians, and explicitly discussed sharing control and negotiation. The complementary, interactive behaviours described in the themes for both patients and physicians illustrate mutual influence of patients and physicians on each other.

How should the impact of different presentations of treatment effects on patient choice be evaluated? A pilot randomized trial

Background

Different presentations of treatment effects can affect decisions. However, previous studies have not evaluated which presentations best help people make decisions that are consistent with their own values. We undertook a pilot study to compare different methods for doing this.

Methods and Findings

We conducted an Internet-based randomized trial comparing summary statistics for communicating the effects of statins on the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Participants rated the relative importance of treatment consequences using visual analogue scales (VAS) and category rating scales (CRS) with five response options. We randomized participants to either VAS or CRS first and to one of six summary statistics: relative risk reduction (RRR) and five absolute measures of effect: absolute risk reduction, number needed to treat, event rates, tablets needed to take, and natural frequencies (whole numbers). We used logistic regression to determine the association between participants' elicited values and treatment choices. 770 participants age 18 or over and literate in English completed the study. In all, 13% in the VAS-first group failed to complete their VAS rating, while 9% of the CRS-first group failed to complete their scoring (p = 0.03). Different ways of weighting the elicited values had little impact on the analyses comparing the different presentations. Most (51%) preferred the RRR compared to the other five summary statistics (1% to 25%, p = 0.074). However, decisions in the group presented the RRR deviated substantially from those made in the other five groups. The odds of participants in the RRR group deciding to take statins were 3.1 to 5.8 times that of those in the other groups across a wide range of values (p = 0.0007). Participants with a scientific background, who were more numerate or had more years of education were more likely to decide not to take statins.

Conclusions

Internet-based trials comparing different presentations of treatment effects are feasible, but recruiting participants is a major challenge. Despite a slightly higher response rate for CRS, VAS is preferable to avoid approximation of a continuous variable. Although most participants preferred the RRR, participants shown the RRR were more likely to decide to take statins regardless of their values compared with participants who were shown any of the five other summary statistics.

Trial Registration

Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN85194921

Improving informed consent: pilot of a decision aid for women invited to participate in a breast cancer prevention trial (IBIS-II DCIS)

BACKGROUND

Patients and clinicians report difficulties with the process of informed consent to clinical trials and audiotape audits show that critical information is often omitted or poorly presented. Decision aids (DAs) may assist in improving consent.

AIMS

This study piloted a DA booklet for a high priority breast cancer prevention trial, IBIS-II DCIS, which compares the efficacy of an aromatase inhibitor (anastrozole) with tamoxifen in women who have had surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

METHOD

Thirty-one Australian women participating in the IBIS-I breast cancer prevention trial and who are currently in follow-up agreed to read the IBIS-II DCIS participant information sheet and the DCIS DA booklet, complete a set of standardized questionnaires, and provide feedback on the DA via a semi-structured phone interview.

RESULTS

Women found the DA helpful in deciding about trial participation, reporting that it aided their understanding over and above the approved IBIS-II DCIS participant information sheet and was not anxiety provoking. Women's understanding of the rationale and methods of clinical trials and the IBIS-II DCIS trial was very good; with more than 80% of items answered correctly. The only areas that were not understood well were the concepts of randomization and blinding.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the DA will be acceptable to and valued by potential participants in the IBIS-II DCIS study. The revised DA is currently being evaluated prospectively in a randomized controlled trial. If successful, such DAs could transform the consent process to large clinical trials and may also reduce dropout rates.

A framework for health numeracy: how patients use quantitative skills in health care

Our objective of this study is to develop a conceptual framework for the construct of health numeracy based on patient perceptions, using a cross-sectional, qualitative design. Interested participants (n=59) meeting eligibility criteria (age 40-74, English speaking) were assigned to one of six focus groups stratified by gender and educational level (low, medium, high). Fifty-three percent were male, and 47% were female. Sixty-one percent were white non-Hispanic, and 39% were of minority race or ethnicity. Participants were randomly selected from three primary care sites associated with an academic medical center. Focus group discussions were held in May 2004 and focused on how numbers are used in the health care setting. Data were presented from clinical trials to further explore how quantitative information is used in health communication and decision making. Focus groups were audio and videotaped; verbatim transcripts were prepared and analyzed. A framework of health numeracy was developed to reflect the themes that emerged. Three broad conceptual domains for health numeracy were identified: primary numeric skills, applied health numeracy, and interpretive health numeracy. Across domains, results suggested that numeracy contains an emotional component, with both positive and negative affect reflected in patient numeracy statements. We conclude that health numeracy is a multifaceted construct that includes applied and interpretive components and is influenced by patient affect.

End-of-life medical treatment choices: do survival chances and out-of-pocket costs matter?

BACKGROUND

Out-of-pocket medical expenditures incurred prior to the death of a spouse could deplete savings and impoverish the surviving spouse. Little is known about the public's opinion as to whether spouses should forego such end-of-life (EOL) medical care to prevent asset depletion.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze how elderly and near elderly adults assess hypothetical EOL medical treatment choices under different survival probabilities and out-of-pocket treatment costs.

METHODS

Survey data on a total of 1143 adults, with 589 from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) and 554 from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), were used to study EOL cancer treatment recommendations for a hypothetical anonymous married woman in her 80s.

RESULTS

Respondents were more likely to recommend treatment when it was financed by Medicare than by the patient's own savings and when it had 60% rather than 20% survival probability. Black and male respondents were more likely to recommend treatment regardless of survival probability or payment source. Treatment uptake was related to the order of presentation of treatment options, consistent with starting point bias and framing effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly and near elderly adults would recommend that the hypothetical married woman should forego costly EOL treatment when the costs of the treatment would deplete savings. When treatment costs are covered by Medicare, respondents would make the recommendation to opt for care even if the probability of survival is low, which is consistent with moral hazard. The sequence of presentation of treatment options seems to affect patient treatment choice.

Risk communication formats for low probability events: an exploratory study of patient preferences

Background

Clear communication about the possible outcomes of proposed medical interventions is an integral part of medical care. Despite its importance, there have been few studies comparing different formats for presenting probabilistic information to patients, especially when small probabilities are involved. The purpose of this study was to explore the potential usefulness of several new small-risk graphic communication formats.

Methods

Information about the likelihoods of cancer and cancer prevention associated with two hypothetical cancer screening programs were used to create an augmented bar chart, an augmented grouped icon display, a flow chart, and three paired combinations of these formats. In the study scenario, the baseline risk of cancer was 53 per 1,000 (5.3%). The risk associated with cancer screening option A was 38 per 1,000 (3.8%) and the risk associated with screening option B was 29 per 1,000 (2.9%). Both the augmented bar chart and the augmented grouped icon display contained magnified views of the differences in cancer risk and cancer prevention associated with the screening programs. A convenience sample of 29 subjects (mean age 56.4 years; 76% men) used the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to indicate their relative preferences for the six formats using 15 sequential paired comparisons.

Results

The most preferred format was the combined augmented bar chart + flow diagram (mean preference score 0.43) followed by the combined augmented icon + augmented bar chart format (mean preference score 0.22). The overall differences among the six formats were statistically significant: Kruskal-Wallis Chi Square = 141.4, p < 0.0001. The three combined formats all had statistically significant higher preferences scores than the single format displays (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

These findings suggest that patients may prefer combined, rather than single, graphic risk presentation formats and that augmented bar charts and icon displays may be useful for conveying comparative information about small risks to clinical decision makers. Further research to confirm and extend these findings is warranted.

Communicating risk information: the influence of graphical display format on quantitative information perception-Accuracy, comprehension and preferences

OBJECTIVE

Statistical health risk information has proved notoriously confusing and difficult to understand. While past research indicates that presenting risk information in a frequency format is superior to relative risk and probability formats, the optimal characteristics of frequency formats are still unclear. The aim of this study is to determine the features of 1000 person frequency diagrams (pictographs) which result in the greatest speed and accuracy of graphical perception.

METHODS

Participants estimated the difference in chance of survival when taking or not taking Drug A, on a pictograph format, varying by mode (one-graph/two-graph), direction (vertical/horizontal), and shading (shaded/unshaded), and their preferences for the different formats. Their understanding of different components of the 1000 person diagram was assessed. Responses were timed and scored for accuracy.

RESULTS

Horizontal pictographs were perceived faster and more accurately than vertical formats. Two-graph pictographs were perceived faster than one-graph formats. Shading reduced response time in two-graph formats, but increased response times in one-graph formats. Shaded and one-graph pictographs were preferred.

CONCLUSIONS

As shading and one-graph formats were preferred, further clarification as to why shading negatively impacts on response times in the one-graph format is warranted.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Horizontal pictographs are optimal.

Filling a void: thyroid cancer surgery information on the internet

BACKGROUND

Thyroid cancer incidence is increasing, making it an important public health issue. Many patients use the Internet for health-related decisions. Our purposes were to measure the quality of thyroid cancer surgery information on the Internet, and to identify quality predictors.

METHODS

The 50 most popular thyroid cancer websites from Google, Yahoo, and MSN were identified. A novel 55-point instrument based on current clinical practice guidelines was designed and used by a Delphi panel of 5 "blinded" endocrine surgeons to assess website information. Each website was independently evaluated by two surgeons. Quality was related to website demographic data using the Student's t-test, chi-square, and ANOVA analyses.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability for quality scores was excellent (kappa = 0.81). Mean (% of overall quality) score was 21 (38%), and mean score for surgical content was low at 3.5 (29%). Only 50% of sites discussed indications for surgery; 8% length of surgery/anesthesia; 42% the role of lymphadenectomy; 44% recurrent laryngeal nerve injury/hoarseness and 42% hypoparathyroidism as potential complications; 16% recovery; and 20% recommendations for choosing a thyroid surgeon. Only 38% were updated within 2 years. On univariate analysis, no significant associations were found between surgical quality score and website country of origin, currency, sponsorship, authorship, oversight, or references.

CONCLUSIONS

Thyroid cancer surgery websites on the Internet are incomplete and outdated. No predictors of quality were identified. Significant improvement is needed in regulating information about thyroid cancer surgery on the Internet, and surgeons may contribute to this effort.

Decision-making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids

OBJECTIVE

To develop and pilot two computer-based decision aids to assist women with decision-making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section (CS), which could then be evaluated in a randomized-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND

Women with a previous CS are faced with a decision between repeat elective CS and vaginal birth after caesarean. Research has shown that women may benefit from access to comprehensive information about the risks and benefits of the delivery options.

DESIGN

A qualitative pilot study of two novel decision aids, an information program and a decision analysis program, which were developed by a multidisciplinary research team.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

15 women who had recently given birth and had previously had a CS and 11 pregnant women with a previous CS, recruited from two UK hospitals. Women were interviewed and observed using the decision aids.

RESULTS

Participants found both decision aids useful and informative. Most liked the computer-based format. Participants found the utility assessment of the decision analysis program acceptable although some had difficulty completing the tasks required. Following the pilot study improvements were made to expand the program content, the decision analysis program was accompanied by a training session and a website version of the information program was developed to allow repeat access.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study was an essential step in the design of the decision aids and in establishing their acceptability and feasibility. In general, participating women viewed the decision aids as a welcome addition to routine antenatal care. A randomized trial has been conducted to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the decision aids.

Perceptions of community HIV prevalence, own HIV infection, and condom use among teachers in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

A total of 120 teachers from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, underwent HIV/AIDS training. As part of the study, the teachers were surveyed, before and after the training, about their perceptions of HIV prevalences among pupils, other teachers, and community members, and about their perceptions of their own HIV status. Before the training, the teachers estimated average HIV prevalences among pupils, other teachers, and other community members to be 36%, 48%, and 61%, respectively. One-third of the teachers believed that they had a 50% or greater chance of currently being infected with HIV. Male teachers and teachers with a university degree gave lower HIV prevalence estimates for other people but not for themselves. Frequency of condom use was positively related to teachers' HIV prevalence estimates for other people. Teachers' estimates of HIV prevalence and perceived risk of own HIV infection increased significantly after the HIV/AIDS training.

Measures used in studies of informed decision making about cancer screening: a systematic review

Interventions to promote informed decision making (IDM) for cancer screening are increasingly common. The resulting body of literature provides an opportunity for a systematic review of measures in use. We searched standard databases for intervention trials and other studies of screening decisions and decision aids, finding 2,110 unique citations (most with abstracts) that we reduced to 104 full-text articles; 36 studies met inclusion criteria (prostate = 20, colorectal = 9, breast = 6, cervical = 1). Two independent coders abstracted data on study characteristics, constructs, and measures. Our findings revealed that most studies measured screening (or intention) and knowledge; fewer measured recommended IDM-related constructs and none measured all outcomes proposed for evaluating IDM interventions. Validity and reliability of measures received inadequate attention in study reports, and conceptual overlap exists among measures. Few IDM measures have been developed/carefully adapted from treatment measures and tested for cancer screening or in diverse populations. We recommend that new and in-progress studies emphasize outcomes beyond knowledge-participation in decision making according to personal preference, satisfaction with the process, and consistency between decisions and values. Also needed is better use of theory to guide conceptualization and operationalization of measures, greater attention to reliability and validity (particularly in diverse populations), more thorough reporting of sources and operating characteristics of measures, and increased emphasis and resources focused on these issues by funders, researchers, and journal editors.

Clinical decision-making: physicians' preferences and experiences

Background

Shared decision-making has been advocated; however there are relatively few studies on physician preferences for, and experiences of, different styles of clinical decision-making as most research has focused on patient preferences and experiences. The objectives of this study were to determine 1) physician preferences for different styles of clinical decision-making; 2) styles of clinical decision-making physicians perceive themselves as practicing; and 3) the congruence between preferred and perceived style. In addition we sought to determine physician perceptions of the availability of time in visits, and their role in encouraging patients to look for health information.

Methods

Cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of U.S. physicians.

Results

1,050 (53% response rate) physicians responded to the survey. Of these, 780 (75%) preferred to share decision-making with their patients, 142 (14%) preferred paternalism, and 118 (11%) preferred consumerism. 87% of physicians perceived themselves as practicing their preferred style. Physicians who preferred their patients to play an active role in decision-making were more likely to report encouraging patients to look for information, and to report having enough time in visits.

Conclusion

Physicians tend to perceive themselves as practicing their preferred role in clinical decision-making. The direction of the association cannot be inferred from these data; however, we suggest that interventions aimed at promoting shared decision-making need to target physicians as well as patients.

Outdated and incomplete: a review of thyroid cancer on the World Wide Web

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the most frequently searched thyroid cancer websites for completeness, accuracy, and consumer friendliness.

DESIGN

The 50 most popular thyroid cancer websites were evaluated using a novel instrument developed by a Delphi panel of endocrine experts and based on practice guidelines. Each website received independent scores for disease-specific information and a final quality score. Quality was related to website demographics using the Student t test, chi-square, and ANOVA analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Interrater reliability was excellent (kappa = 0.81). Most websites were not specific to thyroid cancer alone (72%), contained advertisements (72%), lacked references (66%), and were privately sponsored (50%). Only 38% had been updated within 2 years. "Government" and "Non-Profit" websites were the most consumer friendly. Mean quality score of medical content was 38%, with websites receiving the highest score in "Anatomy/Physiology" (55%) and lowest in "Surgery" (29%). Low quality score was attributed to information deficiency rather than inaccuracy. On univariate analysis, no significant associations were found between quality score and country of origin, currency, sponsorship, authorship, administration, advertisements, or references.

CONCLUSIONS

Thyroid cancer websites are out of date and incomplete, lacking important information sought by patients, particularly surgical information. An accurate, comprehensive, easily available, and patient-oriented thyroid cancer Internet resource is needed for patients.

Clinical decision-making: Patients' preferences and experiences

OBJECTIVE

To determine the congruence between patients' preferred style of clinical decision-making and the style they usually experienced and whether this congruence was associated with socio-economic status and/or the perceived quality of care provided by the respondent's regular doctor.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of the American public using computer-assisted telephone interviewing.

RESULTS

Three thousand two hundred and nine interviews were completed (completion rate 72%). Sixty-two percent of respondents preferred shared decision-making, 28% preferred consumerism and 9% preferred paternalism. Seventy percent experienced their preferred style of clinical decision-making. Experiencing the preferred style was associated with high income (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.16-2.16) and having a regular doctor who was perceived as providing excellent or very good care (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.83-3.11).

CONCLUSION

Both socio-economic status and having a regular doctor whom the respondent rated highly are independently associated with patients experiencing their preferred style of clinical decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Systems which promote continuity of care and the development of an on-going doctor-patient relationship may promote equity in health care, by helping patients experience their preferred style of clinical decision-making.

The impact of patient participation on adherence and clinical outcome in primary care of depression

OBJECTIVE

Patient participation in shared treatment decision-making is hypothesized to improve depression treatment adherence and clinical outcomes in depressed patients. The study aim was to evaluate the impact of patient participation on these factors and to determine the variance of clinical outcome as the primary outcome variable.

METHODS

A survey was administered to 30 general practitioners and 207 depressed patients, at initial consultation and 6-8 weeks later. General practitioners documented their clinical practice and patients completed questionnaires including Brief-PHQ for depression and clinical outcome, patient participation scale, and visual analogue scales for treatment adherence. Assessment of correlations was followed by the development of a structural equation model (as a latent variable analysis) to define a model to explain the entire set of the variables' relationships.

RESULTS

Sixty percent of the variance in clinical outcome was attributable to patient adherence (beta=0.41) and baseline depression severity (beta=0.65). Depression severity predicted clinical outcome but not patient participation. Participation predicted adherence (beta=0.39) but did not directly affect clinical outcome. Adherence was explainable by physician- (beta=0.57) and patient-reported treatment adherence (beta=0.66).

CONCLUSION

In a specific pathway via adherence, patient participation in decision-making influences clinical outcome in primary care of depression.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The research findings reveal the significance of patient participation as a key factor to address for improving treatment adherence and clinical outcome. Quality improvement strategies for depression treatment should emphasize patient participation.

Exploring the black box of a decision aid: what information do patients select from an interactive Cd-Rom on treatment options in breast cancer?

OBJECTIVE

It is thought that patients fare better when they participate in treatment decision-making, and when they have more control over the amount and type of information they receive. To facilitate informed decision-making, interactive decision aids have been introduced in health care. This article describes how much, and which information patients select from an interactive decision aid on breast cancer. To explore whether the interactive system facilitates that different patients receive different information, associations between patients' characteristics and information selection are inspected.

METHODS

The interactive decision aid was provided to 106 patients after an initial discussion with their surgeon about their diagnosis and treatment options. Information regarding patients' age, completed education, treatment preference, psychological functioning, decision uncertainty and decision style was collected with a written, structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed before patients used the interactive decision aid. To create categories, a median-split procedure was employed on the scores of the continuous background variables. The information patients selected from the interactive decision aid were registered into logfiles. Associations between patients' background variables and information selection were investigated by means of univariate statistics.

RESULTS

Patients (n=97; 92%) used the interactive decision aid intensively. On average, patients spent almost 70min searching for information and selected 21 information topics. Overall, treatment related information was clearly more selected than other types of information. Age, education, and decision style factors were associated with information selection.

CONCLUSION

The interactive breast cancer decision aid was utilized intensively. The interactive system was found to facilitate that different patients received different amounts and types of information.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Interactive decision aids may improve information giving to patients, and as a result, the quality of care. To safeguard informed-choice, decision aids should be used in conjunction with other communication strategies. Decision aids should be available continuously and throughout the patients' disease journey. The Internet may help to achieve broad dissemination and enduring access.

Advancing a partnership: patients, families, and medical educators

BACKGROUND

Medical educators must impart not only an immense quantity of knowledge and technical skills but also an essential collection of values, attitudes, and ways of relating that fall under the rubric of professionalism. Along with technical skills and knowledge, becoming a physician requires caring about patients and interacting in ways that meet practical needs.

SUMMARY

One way to meet the challenges of teaching about professionalism and communication is to involve experienced patients and families as partners in education. Patients and family members have participated in health care quality assessment, health care advisory groups, and efforts to implement family-centered care. Medical educators have written competencies for communication and professionalism and have begun to involve patients and families in medical education activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased involvement of patients and families in full partnership with medical educators is a logical outgrowth of changes in relationships between patients and health care providers as described in medical literature.

Summaries of findings, descriptions of interventions, and information about adverse effects would make reviews more informative

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To describe challenges when extracting and presenting relevant, consistent, and accessible information from systematic reviews.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically selected comparisons and outcomes from 18 Cochrane reviews, evaluated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE system, and developed standardized patient information. We evaluated the information using patient, review author, researcher, and clinician feedback.

RESULTS

Challenges included large numbers of comparisons and outcomes; missing information about treatments and adverse effects; and variations in how effect was measured and presented. By selecting comparisons and outcomes based on patient-relevance, quality, and nonredundancy, we halved the number of outcomes. We prepared information about treatments and adverse effects using other sources. We framed outcomes consistently and standardized the presentation of magnitude of effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The incorporation of summary of findings tables in reviews could address these challenges. Problems could also be reduced if review groups agreed upon standard outcomes; excluded less relevant outcomes; incorporated more information about interventions and adverse effects; and implemented clearer guidelines for the presentation of results.