ArticleMDM policy & practice
A Simple Tool for Communicating the Benefits and Harms of Health Interventions: A Guide for Creating a Fact Box.
Article in MDM policy & practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- People's Responses to Nuclear Weapons: Mapping Post-Cold War Research.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026Pooled it
- Synthesizing Cohort Study Results to Promote Knowledge Transfer of Safety Data Regarding Gestational Antidepressant Exposure and Offspring Congenital Anomalies: A Test of Concept.Birth defects research · 2025Pooled it
- Communicating about COVID-19 vaccine development and safety.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Fact Box decision support tools reduce decisional conflict about antibiotics for pneumonia and artificial hydration in advanced dementia: a randomized controlled trail.Age and ageing · 2019Trial
- Developing and Assessing the Acceptability of an Information Booklet for Patients in Surveillance for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: An Intervention Development Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- [Enlightenment through official vaccination communication: an experimental study comparing evidence-based fact boxes with nudges and advertising].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Article
- Evaluating evidence-based health information from generative AI using a cross-sectional study with laypeople seeking screening information.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Explaining seasonality increases perceived effectiveness of influenza vaccination: An experimental study.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- Article
- Systematic Reviews on the Prevention of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Related to Maternal Obesity to Improve Evidence-Based Counselling.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2024Article
- Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Article
- Reference Dependence in Bayesian Reasoning: Value Selection Bias, Congruence Effects, and Response Prompt Sensitivity.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of decision aids on cancer-screening decision-making: an umbrella review protocol.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Are COVID-19 conspiracies a threat to public health? Psychological characteristics and health protective behaviours of believers.European journal of social psychology · 2021Article
- Effect of Information about COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness and Side Effects on Behavioural Intentions: Two Online Experiments.Vaccines · 2021Article
- [Risk communication in the containment of the COVID-19 pandemic: challenges and promising approaches].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021Review
- The Modest Effects of Fact Boxes on Cancer Screening.Journal of risk and uncertainty · 2021Article
- Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools.Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society · 2020Review
- Personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer: ENVISION consensus statement.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Review
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
One of the major hurdles to promoting informed decision making in health is the continued use of poor risk presentation formats. This article offers a guide to develop a Fact Box, a simple decision tool to present data about the benefits and harms of treatments that has been demonstrated to improve understanding of health risks, an important part of risk literacy. The article offers guidance about how to determine the evidence basis for a health topic, select outcomes to report, extract and present numbers or outcomes, and design the layout. The guide also addresses potential challenges for summarizing evidence and provides alternatives for addressing issues related to missing, insufficient, imprecise, or conflicting evidence and for dealing with issues related to statistical and clinical significance. The guide concludes with details on how to document the development of the Fact Box for the purpose of transparency and reproducibility. Fact Boxes are an efficient tool to promote risk literacy and should be available in every physician's office.
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.