ArticlePEC innovation2023
Developing, optimizing, and evaluating patient infographics for diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis.
Article in PEC innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An electronic health record-based strategy to increase PrEP decision-making among cisgender women in primary care: results of a randomized pilot study.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- A Scoping Review of Health Literacy Measurement in U.S. Interventions: Trends, Tools, and Gaps.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
- Design Characteristics, Content Quality, and Credibility Indicators of Online Infographics for Contact Lens Wearers.Clinical optometry · 2026Article
- Awareness and perceived risk of type 2 diabetes among older adults with HIV: results from a qualitative study.AIDS care · 2025Article
- Delayed opportunities for patient-provider communication about medication overuse headache: Mixed methods perspectives from patients and neurologists.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Advancements in diagnostics and treatment options for cardiac amyloidosis have improved patient outcomes, yet few patient education materials exist to help patients understand the disease and diagnosis process. We sought to develop and evaluate a set of plain language, patient-centered infographics describing the condition and common diagnostic tests. Methods: Using health literacy best practices, we developed 7 infographics which were further revised based on multilevel stakeholder feedback. To evaluate the materials, we recruited 100 patients from healthcare settings in Chicago, IL; participants completed a web-assisted interview during which they were randomized 1:1 to first view either our infographics or a standard material. Participants completed a knowledge assessment on their assigned material and subsequently reported impressions of both materials. Results: No differences were found between study arms in knowledge. The infographics took significantly less time to read and were more highly rated by participants in terms of appearance and understandability. Over two-thirds of participants preferred the infographics to the standard. Conclusions: The infographics created may improve the learning process about a complex condition and diagnosis process unknown to most adults. Innovation: These infographics are the first of their kind for cardiac amyloidosis and were created using health literacy best practices.
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.