ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2012
Influence of framing and graphic format on comprehension of risk information among American Indian tribal college students.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effective communication regarding risk of fracture for individuals at risk of fragility fracture: a scoping review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We evaluated methods for presenting risk information by administering six versions of an anonymous survey to 489 American Indian tribal college students. All surveys presented identical numeric information, but framing varied. Half expressed prevention benefits as relative risk reduction, half as absolute risk reduction. One third of surveys used text to describe prevention benefits; one third used text plus bar graph; one third used text plus modified bar graph incorporating a culturally tailored image. The odds ratio (OR) for correct risk interpretation for absolute risk framing vs. relative risk framing was 1.40 (95 % CI = 1.01, 1.93). The OR for correct interpretation of text plus bar graph vs. text only was 2.16 (95 % CI = 1.46, 3.19); OR for text plus culturally tailored bar graph vs. text only was 1.72 (95 % CI = 1.14, 2.60). Risk information including a bar graph was better understood than text-only information; a culturally tailored graph was no more effective than a standard graph.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.