ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2016
Exploring consumer opinions on the presentation of side-effects information in Australian Consumer Medicine Information leaflets.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Severity or Incidence: Labeling Side-Effect Attributes in Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2026Article
- Words and numbers: a comparative study of medical and journalism students' descriptors of risk, numeracy and preferences for health risk communication.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Thai Patients' Drug Safety Knowledge and Perceptions Relating to Different Forms of Written Medicine Information: A Comparative Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Patient's Knowledge of Atorvastatin Information in Patient Information Leaflets: A Pre-Post Intervention Study in Thailand.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Benefits and harms of aspirin to reduce colorectal cancer risk: a cross-sectional study of methods to communicate risk in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Article
- Communicating medication risk to cardiovascular patients in Qatar.International journal of health care quality assurance · 2018Article
- How does the side-effect information in patient information leaflets influence peoples' side-effect expectations? A cross-sectional national survey of 18- to 65-year-olds in England.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017Article
- Consumer interpretation of ramipril and clopidogrel medication risk information - implications for risk communication strategies.Patient preference and adherence · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsumer Medicine Information (CMI) is a brand-specific and standardized source of written medicine information available in Australia for all prescription medicines. Side-effect information is poorly presented in CMI and may not adequately address consumer information needs.
objectiveTo explore consumer opinions on (i) the presentation of side-effect information in existing Australian CMI leaflets and alternative study-designed CMIs and (ii) side-effect risk information and its impact on treatment decision making.
designFuzzy trace, affect heuristic, frequency hypothesis and cognitive-experiential theories were applied when revising existing CMI side-effects sections. Together with good information design, functional linguistics and medicine information expertise, alternative ramipril and clopidogrel CMI versions were proposed. Focus groups were then conducted to address the study objectives. PARTICIPANTS AND
settingThree focus groups (n = 18) were conducted in Sydney, Australia. Mean consumer age was 58 years (range 50-65 years), with equal number of males and females.
resultsAll consumers preferred the alternative CMIs developed as part of the study, with unequivocal preference for the side-effects presented in a simple tabular format, as it allowed quick and easy access to information. Consumer misunderstandings reflected literacy and numeracy issues inherent in consumer risk appraisal. Many preferred no numerical information and a large proportion preferred natural frequencies.
conclusionsOne single method of risk presentation in CMI is unable to cater for all consumers. Consumer misunderstandings are indicative of possible health literacy and numeracy factors that influence consumer risk appraisal, which should be explored further.
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.