Design features of graphs in health risk communication: A systematic review

被引:371
作者
Ancker, Jessica S.
Senathirajah, Yalini
Kukafka, Rita
Starren, Justin B.
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Coll Phys & Surg, Dept Biomed Informat, New York, NY 10034 USA
[2] Columbia Univ, Mailman Sch Publ Hlth, New York, NY USA
[3] Marshfield Clin Res Fdn, Marshfield, WI USA
关键词
D O I
10.1197/jamia.M2115
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
This review describes recent experimental and focus group research on graphics as a method of communication about quantitative health risks. Some of the studies discussed in this review assessed. effect of graphs on quantitative reasoning, others assessed effects on behavior or behavioral intentions, and still others assessed viewers' likes and dislikes. Graphical features that improve the accuracy of quantitative reasoning appear to differ from the features most likely to alter behavior or intentions. For example, graphs that make part-to-whole relationships available visually may help people attend to the relationship between the numerator (the number of people affected by a hazard) and the denominator (the entire population at risk), whereas graphs that show only the numerator appear to inflate the perceived risk and may induce risk-averse behavior. Viewers often preferred design features such as visual simplicity and familiarity that were not associated with accurate quantitative judgments. Communicators should not assume that all graphics are more intuitive than text; many of the studies found that patients' interpretations of the graphics were dependent upon expertise or instruction. Potentially useful directions for continuing research include interactions with educational level, and numeracy and successful ways to communicate uncertainty about risk.
引用
收藏
页码:608 / 618
页数:11
相关论文
共 79 条
[31]  
Huff D., 1954, How to lie with statistics
[32]   PRESENTING UNCERTAINTY IN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - INITIAL STUDIES OF ITS EFFECTS ON RISK PERCEPTION AND TRUST [J].
JOHNSON, BB ;
SLOVIC, P .
RISK ANALYSIS, 1995, 15 (04) :485-494
[33]   INFORMATION DISPLAYS AND PREFERENCE REVERSALS [J].
JOHNSON, EJ ;
PAYNE, JW ;
BETTMAN, JR .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1988, 42 (01) :1-21
[34]   Shared medical decision making - A new tool for preventive medicine [J].
Kaplan, RM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2004, 26 (01) :81-83
[35]  
KAPLAN RM, 1986, J SOC BEHAV PERS, V1, P113
[36]  
Lau EW, 2002, MED DECIS MAKING, V22, P238
[37]   A new tool for communicating transfusion risk information [J].
Lee, DH ;
Paling, JE ;
Blajchman, MA .
TRANSFUSION, 1998, 38 (02) :184-188
[38]   Evaluation of a visual risk communication tool: effects on knowledge and perception of blood transfusion risk [J].
Lee, DH ;
Mehta, MD .
TRANSFUSION, 2003, 43 (06) :779-787
[39]   Use of meta-analytic results to facilitate shared decision making [J].
Lenert, LA ;
Cher, DJ .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 1999, 6 (05) :412-419
[40]  
Lipkus I M, 1999, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, P149