Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39226280›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Presenting decision-relevant numerical information to Dutch women aged 50-70 with varying levels of health literacy: Case example of adjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer.

Inge S van Strien-Knippenberg, Daniëlle R M Timmermans, Ellen G Engelhardt, Inge R H M Konings, Olga C Damman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Inge S van Strien-KnippenbergDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0886-9224
Daniëlle R M TimmermansDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3602-3875
Ellen G EngelhardtDivision of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Inge R H M KoningsDepartment of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Olga C DammanDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIf communicated adequately, numerical decision-relevant information can support informed and shared decision making. Visual formats are recommended, but which format supports patients depending on their health literacy (HL) levels for specific decisions is unclear. STUDY

aimThe aim of this study is to investigate: 1) the effect of survival rates and side-effects presentation formats on comprehension and 'feeling informed'; 2) differential effects among women with higher/lower HL, with adjuvant systemic breast cancer therapy as case example.

methodsTwo online experiments among women from the Dutch population without a history of breast cancer were conducted. Experiment 1 had a 3 (survival rate format: text block-bar graph-icon array) x 2 (HL: low-high) between-subjects design. Experiment 2 had a 5 (side-effects format: no probability information-probability information in numbers with or without a visualisation-probability information in numbers with or without a visualisation accompanied by a description of the side-effects) x 2 (HL: low-high) design. Primary outcomes were comprehension and feeling informed (Experiment 2 only). Formats were previously designed in co-creation with patients.

resultsIn Experiment 1, presentation format did not affect gist or verbatim comprehension. Higher HL was associated with higher gist comprehension. Experiment 2 showed an interaction between presentation format and HL on 'feeling informed'. When provided with visualised probability information without a description of the side-effects, women with lower HL felt better informed than women with higher HL.

conclusionVisual formats did not enhance comprehension of survival rate information beyond a well-designed text block format. However, none of the formats could overcome HL differences. When designing decision-relevant information, visualisations might not necessarily provide an advantage over structured numerical information for both patients with lower and higher HL. However, a deeper understanding of presenting side-effect information is warranted.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsHealth LiteracyAgedChemotherapy, AdjuvantComprehensionDecision MakingFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNetherlands

Identifiers

PMID39226280
PMCPMC11371237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.