Infographics as a communication tool in pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Caroline W Sasser, Joanna Chu, Mia Curigliano, Elizabeth George, Charlotte Murray, Jun Kai Tan, Sydney N Nicolla
{"title":"Infographics as a communication tool in pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences.","authors":"Caroline W Sasser, Joanna Chu, Mia Curigliano, Elizabeth George, Charlotte Murray, Jun Kai Tan, Sydney N Nicolla","doi":"10.1016/j.sapharm.2025.03.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Infographics may be more effective at communicating scientific research compared to text-based abstracts. Using well-designed infographics may expand target audiences beyond the traditional scholarly circles.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aims to compare the effectiveness and viewer experience of infographics vs. text-based abstracts as research communication tools.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A posttest-only, between-participants, digital pilot study was conducted in early 2024. Participants from the field of pharmacy or pharmaceutical sciences were randomized to view either infographics or text-based abstracts for the same research articles. Articles and infographics chosen were sourced from peer-reviewed journals. Survey items, designed from previously published research and by authors, assessed understanding, recall, effectiveness, cognition (cognitive load), and attention. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical and ordinal data. Unpaired two-sided t-tests were used to analyze continuous data. Internal reliabilities were calculated for each Likert scale. Exclusion criteria included responses recorded in less than 300 seconds and responses that did not complete all questions for at least one article.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Final analysis included data from 30 infographics viewers and 16 text-based abstracts viewers. Most participants were white, female students from the United States without any reported learning disabilities. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences observed between any measure type. Some infographics had significantly better scores on attention and effectiveness items.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Some infographics may perform better than text-based abstracts on measures of attention and effectiveness. The study lacks sufficient power, potentially resulting in failure to detect true differences. Results may differ in populations including non-experts, neurodivergent readers, and individuals whose first language is not English.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Infographics may be no better than abstracts at communicating research findings within an audience of scientific readers. Further investigation is warranted to understand how to best leverage infographics as a communication tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":48126,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2025.03.008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Infographics may be more effective at communicating scientific research compared to text-based abstracts. Using well-designed infographics may expand target audiences beyond the traditional scholarly circles.

Aims: This study aims to compare the effectiveness and viewer experience of infographics vs. text-based abstracts as research communication tools.

Methods: A posttest-only, between-participants, digital pilot study was conducted in early 2024. Participants from the field of pharmacy or pharmaceutical sciences were randomized to view either infographics or text-based abstracts for the same research articles. Articles and infographics chosen were sourced from peer-reviewed journals. Survey items, designed from previously published research and by authors, assessed understanding, recall, effectiveness, cognition (cognitive load), and attention. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical and ordinal data. Unpaired two-sided t-tests were used to analyze continuous data. Internal reliabilities were calculated for each Likert scale. Exclusion criteria included responses recorded in less than 300 seconds and responses that did not complete all questions for at least one article.

Results: Final analysis included data from 30 infographics viewers and 16 text-based abstracts viewers. Most participants were white, female students from the United States without any reported learning disabilities. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences observed between any measure type. Some infographics had significantly better scores on attention and effectiveness items.

Discussion: Some infographics may perform better than text-based abstracts on measures of attention and effectiveness. The study lacks sufficient power, potentially resulting in failure to detect true differences. Results may differ in populations including non-experts, neurodivergent readers, and individuals whose first language is not English.

Conclusion: Infographics may be no better than abstracts at communicating research findings within an audience of scientific readers. Further investigation is warranted to understand how to best leverage infographics as a communication tool.

将信息图表作为药学和制药科学的交流工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
225
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy (RSAP) is a quarterly publication featuring original scientific reports and comprehensive review articles in the social and administrative pharmaceutical sciences. Topics of interest include outcomes evaluation of products, programs, or services; pharmacoepidemiology; medication adherence; direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medications; disease state management; health systems reform; drug marketing; medication distribution systems such as e-prescribing; web-based pharmaceutical/medical services; drug commerce and re-importation; and health professions workforce issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信