Jessica S Ancker, Natalie C Benda, Mohit M Sharma, Stephen B Johnson, Michelle Demetres, Diana Delgado, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher
{"title":"How Point (Single-Probability) Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format, Part 2: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.","authors":"Jessica S Ancker, Natalie C Benda, Mohit M Sharma, Stephen B Johnson, Michelle Demetres, Diana Delgado, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher","doi":"10.1177/23814683241255337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> The Making Numbers Meaningful review is intended to create guidance on the effect of data presentation format on comprehension of numbers in health. <b>Purpose.</b> This article (one of a series) covers research studying so-called \"point tasks,\" in which a reader examines materials to obtain information about single probabilities. The current article presents evidence on the effects of data presentation format on probability perceptions and feelings, health behaviors and behavioral intentions, trust, preference, and discrimination outcomes. <b>Data Sources.</b> MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, ERIC, ACM Digital Library; hand search of 4 journals. <b>Study Selection.</b> Manual pairwise screening to identify experimental and quasi-experimental research that compared 2 or more formats for presenting quantitative health information to patients or other lay audiences. This article reports 466 findings of probability communication from 161 articles. <b>Data Extraction.</b> Pairwise extraction of information on stimulus (data in a data presentation format), task, and outcomes. <b>Data Synthesis.</b> Moderate to strong evidence is available on the effects of several format interventions to influence probability perceptions and feelings, including the 1-in-X number format, foreground-only (numerator-only) icon arrays, bar charts, anecdotes, framing, and verbal probabilities. However, only 3 (the 1-in-X effect, anecdotes, and framing) had moderate to strong evidence of influencing health behaviors and behavioral intentions. Research on patient preferences for numerical, graphical, and verbal formats yielded only weak evidence. <b>Conclusions.</b> The link between probability perceptions/feelings and health behaviors is not strongly reflected in the evidence about communicating numbers because many communication-focused studies measure short-term response rather than longer-term behaviors. Also, research into patient preferences for numerical, graphical, and verbal formats has not yielded strong evidence suggesting stable and predictable preferences.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Formatting a probability as 1 in X, using a foreground-only icon array, adding anecdotes to numbers, and gain-loss framing all affect probability perceptions and feelings.The evidence on communicating numbers to influence perceptions is far stronger than the evidence on using it to change health behavior or behavioral intention.Only weak evidence is available on patient preferences for verbal, graphical, and numerical probability formats.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"10 1","pages":"23814683241255337"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11848894/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683241255337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background. The Making Numbers Meaningful review is intended to create guidance on the effect of data presentation format on comprehension of numbers in health. Purpose. This article (one of a series) covers research studying so-called "point tasks," in which a reader examines materials to obtain information about single probabilities. The current article presents evidence on the effects of data presentation format on probability perceptions and feelings, health behaviors and behavioral intentions, trust, preference, and discrimination outcomes. Data Sources. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, ERIC, ACM Digital Library; hand search of 4 journals. Study Selection. Manual pairwise screening to identify experimental and quasi-experimental research that compared 2 or more formats for presenting quantitative health information to patients or other lay audiences. This article reports 466 findings of probability communication from 161 articles. Data Extraction. Pairwise extraction of information on stimulus (data in a data presentation format), task, and outcomes. Data Synthesis. Moderate to strong evidence is available on the effects of several format interventions to influence probability perceptions and feelings, including the 1-in-X number format, foreground-only (numerator-only) icon arrays, bar charts, anecdotes, framing, and verbal probabilities. However, only 3 (the 1-in-X effect, anecdotes, and framing) had moderate to strong evidence of influencing health behaviors and behavioral intentions. Research on patient preferences for numerical, graphical, and verbal formats yielded only weak evidence. Conclusions. The link between probability perceptions/feelings and health behaviors is not strongly reflected in the evidence about communicating numbers because many communication-focused studies measure short-term response rather than longer-term behaviors. Also, research into patient preferences for numerical, graphical, and verbal formats has not yielded strong evidence suggesting stable and predictable preferences.
Highlights: Formatting a probability as 1 in X, using a foreground-only icon array, adding anecdotes to numbers, and gain-loss framing all affect probability perceptions and feelings.The evidence on communicating numbers to influence perceptions is far stronger than the evidence on using it to change health behavior or behavioral intention.Only weak evidence is available on patient preferences for verbal, graphical, and numerical probability formats.
背景。《使数字有意义》综述旨在就数据呈现格式对理解卫生数字的影响提供指导。目的。本文(系列文章之一)涵盖了对所谓“点任务”的研究,其中读者检查材料以获取有关单个概率的信息。本文就数据呈现格式对概率感知和感觉、健康行为和行为意图、信任、偏好和歧视结果的影响提供了证据。数据源。MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane图书馆、PsycINFO、ERIC、ACM数字图书馆;手工检索4种期刊。研究选择。手动两两筛选,以确定实验和准实验研究,比较两种或更多格式,以向患者或其他外行观众提供定量健康信息。本文报告了161篇文章中466个概率通信的发现。数据提取。两两提取刺激(数据表示格式的数据)、任务和结果的信息。合成数据。关于几种格式干预对概率感知和感觉的影响,包括1-in-X数字格式、仅前景(仅分子)图标数组、条形图、轶事、框架和口头概率的影响,有中等到强有力的证据。然而,只有3个(1-in-X效应,轶事和框架)有中等到强烈的证据影响健康行为和行为意图。关于患者对数字、图形和语言格式的偏好的研究只得到了微弱的证据。结论。概率感知/感觉和健康行为之间的联系并没有在关于交流数量的证据中得到强烈反映,因为许多以交流为重点的研究衡量的是短期反应,而不是长期行为。此外,对患者对数字、图形和语言格式的偏好的研究还没有产生强有力的证据表明稳定和可预测的偏好。亮点:将概率格式化为1 in X,使用前景图标数组,将轶事添加到数字中,以及得失框架都会影响概率感知和感受。通过数字交流来影响观念的证据远比用数字来改变健康行为或行为意图的证据有力。只有微弱的证据表明患者对口头、图形和数字概率格式的偏好。