Using Separate Single-Outcome Risk Presentations Instead of Integrated Multioutcome Formats Improves Comprehension in Discrete Choice Experiments

Matthew J. Wallace, E. Hope Weissler, Jui-Chen Yang, Laura Brotzman, Matthew A. Corriere, Eric A. Secemsky, Jessie Sutphin, F. Reed Johnson, Juan Marcos Gonzalez, Michelle E. Tarver, Anindita Saha, Allen L. Chen, David J. Gebben, Misti Malone, Andrew Farb, Olufemi Babalola, Eva M. Rorer, Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher and Shelby D. Reed
Additional contact information
Matthew J. Wallace: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
E. Hope Weissler: Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
Jui-Chen Yang: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
Laura Brotzman: University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Matthew A. Corriere: University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Eric A. Secemsky: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
Jessie Sutphin: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
F. Reed Johnson: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
Juan Marcos Gonzalez: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
Michelle E. Tarver: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Anindita Saha: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Allen L. Chen: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
David J. Gebben: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Misti Malone: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Andrew Farb: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Olufemi Babalola: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Eva M. Rorer: US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher: University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Shelby D. Reed: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA

Medical Decision Making, 2024, vol. 44, issue 6, 649-660

Abstract: Introduction Despite decades of research on risk-communication approaches, questions remain about the optimal methods for conveying risks for different outcomes across multiple time points, which can be necessary in applications such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs). We sought to compare the effects of 3 design factors: 1) separated versus integrated presentations of the risks for different outcomes, 2) use or omission of icon arrays, and 3) vertical versus horizontal orientation of the time dimension. Methods We conducted a randomized study among a demographically diverse sample of 2,242 US adults recruited from an online panel (mean age 59.8 y, s  = 10.4 y; 21.9% African American) that compared risk-communication approaches that varied in the 3 factors noted above. The primary outcome was the number of correct responses to 12 multiple-choice questions asking survey respondents to identify specific numbers, contrast options to recognize dominance (larger v. smaller risks), and compute differences. We used linear regression to test the effects of the 3 design factors, controlling for health literacy, graph literacy, and numeracy. We also measured choice consistency in a subsequent DCE choice module Results Mean comprehension varied significantly across versions ( P  

Keywords: risk-communication; discrete choice experiment; numeracy; literacy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X241258466 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:44:y:2024:i:6:p:649-660

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X241258466

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().