Trial reportBMC medical informatics and decision making2012
Understanding and using comparative healthcare information; the effect of the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills.
Trial report in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a new design solution for the visualisation of a risk-adjusted hospital performance comparison: results of an end user-centred mixed methods study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- The significance of initial lactate levels in emergency department presentations of abdominal wall hernia.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Any Questions? Understanding the Functional Health Literacy in Patients Who Underwent Ureteroscopy.Urology · 2024Article
- Testing the effects on information use by older versus younger women of modality and narration style in a hospital report card.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Hospital choice in Germany from the patient's perspective: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2017Observational
- Making comparative performance information more comprehensible: an experimental evaluation of the impact of formats on consumer understanding.BMJ quality & safety · 2016Article
- Characterizing internet health information seeking strategies by socioeconomic status: a mixed methods approach.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Article
- Healthcare professionals' views on feedback of a patient safety culture assessment.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- Article
- What Influences Patients' Decisions When Choosing a Health Care Provider? Measuring Preferences of Patients with Knee Arthrosis, Chronic Depression, or Alzheimer's Disease, Using Discrete Choice Experiments.Health services research · 2015Article
- Patients' perspectives of care and surgical outcomes in Michigan: an analysis using the CAHPS hospital survey.Annals of surgery · 2014Article
- Delivering patient decision aids on the Internet: definitions, theories, current evidence, and emerging research areas.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsumers are increasingly exposed to comparative healthcare information (information about the quality of different healthcare providers). Partly because of its complexity, the use of this information has been limited. The objective of this study was to examine how the amount of presented information influences the comprehension and use of comparative healthcare information when important consumer characteristics and skills are taken into account.
methodsIn this randomized controlled experiment, comparative information on total hip or knee surgery was used as a test case. An online survey was distributed among 800 members of the NIVEL Insurants Panel and 76 hip- or knee surgery patients. Participants were assigned to one of four subgroups, who were shown 3, 7, 11 or 15 quality aspects of three hospitals. We conducted Kruskall-Wallis tests, Chi-square tests and hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses to examine relationships between the amount of information and consumer characteristics and skills (literacy, numeracy, active choice behaviour) on one hand, and outcome measures related to effectively using information (comprehension, perceived usefulness of information, hospital choice, ease of making a choice) on the other hand.
results414 people (47%) participated. Regression analysis showed that the amount of information slightly influenced the comprehension and the perceived usefulness of comparative healthcare information. It did not affect consumers' hospital choice and ease of making this choice. Consumer characteristics (especially age) and skills (especially literacy) were the most important factors affecting the comprehension of information and the ease of making a hospital choice. For the perceived usefulness of comparative information, active choice behaviour was the most influencing factor.
conclusionThe effects of the amount of information were not unambiguous. It remains unclear what the ideal amount of quality information to be presented would be. Reducing the amount of information will probably not automatically result in more effective use of comparative healthcare information by consumers. More important, consumer characteristics and skills appeared to be more influential factors contributing to information comprehension and use. Consequently, we would suggest that more emphasis on improving consumers' skills is needed to enhance the use of comparative healthcare information.
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.