首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Symbols were superior to numbers for presenting strength of recommendations to health care consumers: a randomized trial
Authors:Akl Elie A  Maroun Nancy  Guyatt Gordon  Oxman Andrew D  Alonso-Coello Pablo  Vist Gunn E  Devereaux P J  Montori Victor M  Schünemann Holger J
Affiliation:

aDepartment of Medicine, University at Buffalo, NY, USA

bDepartment of Sociology, University at Buffalo, NY, USA

cDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

dDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

eNorwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway

fIberoamerican Cochrane Center, Hospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain

gKnowledge and Encounter Research Unit, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

hDepartment of Epidemiology, Italian National Cancer Institute Regina Elena, Via Elio Chianesi 53, 00144 Rome, Italy

Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To compare health care consumers' understanding, evaluations, and preferences for symbols vs. numbers and letters for the representation of strength of recommendations (SOR) and quality of evidence (QOE). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Questionnaire study in a randomized controlled design in the setting of a community health education program. RESULTS: Eighty-four participants completed the questionnaire. For the presentation of the SOR, participants had better objective understanding of symbols than numbers (74% vs. 14%, P<0.001). They also scored symbols positively, and numbers negatively for ease of understanding (mean difference [md]=1.5, P=0.001), clearness and conciseness (md=1.5, P<0.001), and conveyance of the degree of uncertainty (md=0.7, P=0.092). About half (48%) preferred symbols over numbers. For the presentation of the QOE, objective understanding of symbols and letters was similar (91% vs. 95%, P=0.509). Participants scored both symbols and letters positively; the scores for symbols were however lower for ease of understanding (md=-0.7, P=0.019), clearness and conciseness (md=-0.6, P=0.051), and conveyance of the QOE (md=-0.4, P=0.24). CONCLUSION: Symbols were superior to numbers for the presentation of the SOR. Objective understanding was high for both symbols and letters for the presentation of the QOE, but letters conveyed the QOE better than symbols.
Keywords:Guidelines   Consumer participation   Randomized controlled trial   Symbols   Numbers   Letters
本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号