综合任务如何受到概率格式的影响:一个有意义的系统评价。

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
MDM Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2025-02-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683241293796
Natalie C Benda, Mohit M Sharma, Jessica S Ancker, Michelle Demetres, Diana Delgado, Stephen B Johnson, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher
{"title":"综合任务如何受到概率格式的影响:一个有意义的系统评价。","authors":"Natalie C Benda, Mohit M Sharma, Jessica S Ancker, Michelle Demetres, Diana Delgado, Stephen B Johnson, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher","doi":"10.1177/23814683241293796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> To develop guidance on the effect of data presentation format on communication of health probabilities, the Making Numbers Meaningful project undertook a systematic review. <b>Purpose.</b> This article, one in a series, covers evidence about a \"synthesis task,\" in which readers examine stimuli to synthesize information about multiple features of health options, such as chances of both harm and benefit for a treatment. This article presents evidence of the effect of format on perceptual, cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes. <b>Data Sources.</b> MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, ERIC, ACM Digital Library; hand search of 4 journals. <b>Finding Selection.</b> Manual pairwise screening to identify experimental and quasi-experimental research comparing 2 or more formats for presenting quantitative health information to lay audiences. This article reports on 91 findings derived from 45 unique studies reported in 42 articles. <b>Data Extraction.</b> Pairwise extraction of information on stimulus (data in a data presentation format), cognitive task, and perceptual, affective, cognitive, or behavioral outcomes. <b>Data Synthesis.</b> Evidence was found about 6 outcomes: identification/recall, contrast, effectiveness perceptions/feelings, behavioral intentions/behavior, trust, and preference. No strong evidence was found. Moderate evidence suggests that for synthesis tasks, behavioral intention is not affected by whether the risk and benefit probabilities are in text or in tables, that people prefer tables to text for presenting this information, and that effectiveness feelings are not affected by whether or not numbers are supplemented by narratives. <b>Limitations.</b> Granular data extraction and evidence syntheses lead to narrow evidence statements. <b>Conclusions.</b> Current evidence on synthesis tasks is moderate strength at best. Future studies should enrich the evidence on how to present information needed to synthesize multiple features of health options, given the importance of this task.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>This study found a moderate number of studies assessing strategies for evaluating sets of probabilities conveying information such as risks and benefits.Evidence is moderate that although presenting sets of probabilities in table versus sentences may not affect behavioral intentions, people may prefer tables.Contrary to previous studies about probability feelings, moderate evidence suggested that narratives may not affect effectiveness feelings.Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions regarding contrast, identification, and trust outcomes, and no studies assessed recall, categorization, computation, or discrimination outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"10 1","pages":"23814683241293796"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11848887/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Synthesis Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Natalie C Benda, Mohit M Sharma, Jessica S Ancker, Michelle Demetres, Diana Delgado, Stephen B Johnson, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23814683241293796\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background.</b> To develop guidance on the effect of data presentation format on communication of health probabilities, the Making Numbers Meaningful project undertook a systematic review. <b>Purpose.</b> This article, one in a series, covers evidence about a \\\"synthesis task,\\\" in which readers examine stimuli to synthesize information about multiple features of health options, such as chances of both harm and benefit for a treatment. This article presents evidence of the effect of format on perceptual, cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes. <b>Data Sources.</b> MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, ERIC, ACM Digital Library; hand search of 4 journals. <b>Finding Selection.</b> Manual pairwise screening to identify experimental and quasi-experimental research comparing 2 or more formats for presenting quantitative health information to lay audiences. This article reports on 91 findings derived from 45 unique studies reported in 42 articles. <b>Data Extraction.</b> Pairwise extraction of information on stimulus (data in a data presentation format), cognitive task, and perceptual, affective, cognitive, or behavioral outcomes. <b>Data Synthesis.</b> Evidence was found about 6 outcomes: identification/recall, contrast, effectiveness perceptions/feelings, behavioral intentions/behavior, trust, and preference. No strong evidence was found. Moderate evidence suggests that for synthesis tasks, behavioral intention is not affected by whether the risk and benefit probabilities are in text or in tables, that people prefer tables to text for presenting this information, and that effectiveness feelings are not affected by whether or not numbers are supplemented by narratives. <b>Limitations.</b> Granular data extraction and evidence syntheses lead to narrow evidence statements. <b>Conclusions.</b> Current evidence on synthesis tasks is moderate strength at best. Future studies should enrich the evidence on how to present information needed to synthesize multiple features of health options, given the importance of this task.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>This study found a moderate number of studies assessing strategies for evaluating sets of probabilities conveying information such as risks and benefits.Evidence is moderate that although presenting sets of probabilities in table versus sentences may not affect behavioral intentions, people may prefer tables.Contrary to previous studies about probability feelings, moderate evidence suggested that narratives may not affect effectiveness feelings.Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions regarding contrast, identification, and trust outcomes, and no studies assessed recall, categorization, computation, or discrimination outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MDM Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"23814683241293796\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11848887/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MDM Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683241293796\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683241293796","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

摘要

背景。为了制定关于数据表示格式对健康概率传播的影响的指导,“使数字有意义”项目进行了系统审查。目的。这篇文章是一系列文章中的一篇,涵盖了关于“综合任务”的证据,在这个任务中,读者通过检查刺激来综合有关健康选择的多个特征的信息,例如治疗的危害和益处的可能性。这篇文章提出了格式对感知、认知、情感和行为结果的影响的证据。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。发现选择。手动两两筛选,以确定实验和准实验研究,比较两种或更多的格式,以提供定量的健康信息给非专业观众。本文报告了42篇文章中45项独特研究的91项发现。数据提取。两两抽取刺激(数据表示格式的数据)、认知任务和知觉、情感、认知或行为结果的信息。合成数据。发现了6个结果的证据:识别/回忆、对比、有效性感知/感觉、行为意图/行为、信任和偏好。没有发现强有力的证据。适度的证据表明,对于综合任务,行为意图不受风险和收益概率是在文本中还是在表格中影响,人们更喜欢表格而不是文本来呈现这些信息,有效性感受不受数字是否辅以叙述的影响。的局限性。细粒度的数据提取和证据合成导致了狭隘的证据陈述。结论。目前关于综合任务的证据最多是中等强度的。鉴于这项任务的重要性,未来的研究应丰富证据,说明如何提供综合健康选择的多种特征所需的信息。重点:本研究发现了适度数量的研究评估策略,以评估传递信息(如风险和收益)的概率集。证据是温和的,尽管在表格和句子中呈现概率集可能不会影响行为意图,但人们可能更喜欢表格。与以往关于概率感受的研究相反,适度的证据表明,叙述可能不会影响有效性感受。证据不足以得出关于对比、识别和信任结果的结论,并且没有研究评估召回、分类、计算或歧视结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Synthesis Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.

Background. To develop guidance on the effect of data presentation format on communication of health probabilities, the Making Numbers Meaningful project undertook a systematic review. Purpose. This article, one in a series, covers evidence about a "synthesis task," in which readers examine stimuli to synthesize information about multiple features of health options, such as chances of both harm and benefit for a treatment. This article presents evidence of the effect of format on perceptual, cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes. Data Sources. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, ERIC, ACM Digital Library; hand search of 4 journals. Finding Selection. Manual pairwise screening to identify experimental and quasi-experimental research comparing 2 or more formats for presenting quantitative health information to lay audiences. This article reports on 91 findings derived from 45 unique studies reported in 42 articles. Data Extraction. Pairwise extraction of information on stimulus (data in a data presentation format), cognitive task, and perceptual, affective, cognitive, or behavioral outcomes. Data Synthesis. Evidence was found about 6 outcomes: identification/recall, contrast, effectiveness perceptions/feelings, behavioral intentions/behavior, trust, and preference. No strong evidence was found. Moderate evidence suggests that for synthesis tasks, behavioral intention is not affected by whether the risk and benefit probabilities are in text or in tables, that people prefer tables to text for presenting this information, and that effectiveness feelings are not affected by whether or not numbers are supplemented by narratives. Limitations. Granular data extraction and evidence syntheses lead to narrow evidence statements. Conclusions. Current evidence on synthesis tasks is moderate strength at best. Future studies should enrich the evidence on how to present information needed to synthesize multiple features of health options, given the importance of this task.

Highlights: This study found a moderate number of studies assessing strategies for evaluating sets of probabilities conveying information such as risks and benefits.Evidence is moderate that although presenting sets of probabilities in table versus sentences may not affect behavioral intentions, people may prefer tables.Contrary to previous studies about probability feelings, moderate evidence suggested that narratives may not affect effectiveness feelings.Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions regarding contrast, identification, and trust outcomes, and no studies assessed recall, categorization, computation, or discrimination outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
MDM Policy and Practice
MDM Policy and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信