Trial reportMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2015
Presenting Numeric Information with Percentages and Descriptive Risk Labels: A Randomized Trial.
Trial report in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving cancer clinical trial enrollment and patient understanding using TrialTalk, a structured communication method: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
- Communicating about chemicals in cigarette smoke: impact on knowledge and misunderstanding.Tobacco control · 2020Trial
- Influence of Explanatory Images on Risk Perceptions and Treatment Preference.Arthritis care & research · 2018Trial
- Disclosure of Personalized Rheumatoid Arthritis Risk Using Genetics, Biomarkers, and Lifestyle Factors to Motivate Health Behavior Improvements: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Arthritis care & research · 2018Trial
- Cardiorespiratory and Glycaemic Changes Following Prehospital Nebulised Salbutamol in Acute Asthma: A Mixed Retrospective and Prospective Observational Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2026Article
- Perspectives of People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Towards a Decision Aid Assessing Preferences of Glucose-Lowering Drugs: The Dilemma of Choosing.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Designing a decision aid for cancer prevention: a qualitative study.Family practice · 2024Article
- Development of a communication platform for patients with head and neck cancer for effective information delivery and improvement of doctor-patient relationship: application of treatment journey-based service blueprint.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Review
- Investigation of Platelet Function Analyzer 200 platelet function measurements in healthy cats and cats receiving clopidogrel.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2023Article
- Pharmacogenomics in practice: a review and implementation guide.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Patient-provider communication while using a clinical decision support tool: explaining satisfaction with shared decision making for mammography screening.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Evaluation of adverse drug reaction formatting in drug information mobile phone applications.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- Practising shared decision making in primary care.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2021Article
- Evaluation of adverse drug reaction formatting in drug information databases.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- Adverse drug reactions in drug information databases: does presentation affect interpretation?Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- Impact of Information Presentation Format on Preference for Total Knee Replacement Surgery.Arthritis care & research · 2019Article
- Use of descriptive and experiential information in decision making by young and older adults.Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition · 2018Article
- Combining risk communication strategies to simultaneously convey the risks of four diseases associated with physical inactivity to socio-demographically diverse populations.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2018Article
- Exploring health literacy and preferences for risk communication among medical oncology patients.PloS one · 2018Article
- Choosing a Doctor: Does Presentation Format Affect the Way Consumers Use Health Care Performance Information?The patient · 2017Article
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
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research demonstrated that providing (v. not providing) numeric information about the adverse effects (AEs) of medications increased comprehension and willingness to use medication but left open the question about which numeric format is best. The objective was to determine which of 4 tested formats (percentage, frequency, percentage + risk label, frequency + risk label) maximizes comprehension and willingness to use medication across age and numeracy levels.
methodsIn a cross-sectional internet survey (N = 368; American Life Panel, 15 May 2008 to 18 June 2008), respondents were presented with a hypothetical prescription medication for high cholesterol. AE likelihoods were described using 1 of 4 tested formats. Main outcome measures were risk comprehension (ability to identify AE likelihood from a table) and willingness to use the medication (7-point scale; not likely = 0, very likely = 6).
resultsThe percentage + risk label format resulted in the highest comprehension and willingness to use the medication compared with the other 3 formats (mean comprehension in percentage + risk label format = 95% v. mean across the other 3 formats = 81%; mean willingness = 3.3 v. 2.95, respectively). Comprehension differences between percentage and frequency formats were smaller among the less numerate. Willingness to use medication depended less on age and numeracy when labels were used. Generalizability is limited by the use of a sample that was older, more educated, and better off financially than national averages.
conclusionsProviding numeric AE-likelihood information in a percentage format with risk labels is likely to increase risk comprehension and willingness to use a medication compared with other numeric formats.
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.