Utilization of Continuous “Spinners†to Communicate Risk

Rachel F. Eyler, Sara Cordes, Benjamin R. Szymanski and Liana Fraenkel

Medical Decision Making, 2017, vol. 37, issue 6, 725-729

Abstract: Background. As patients become more involved in their medical care, they must consider the specific probabilities of both positive and negative outcomes associated with different treatments. Patients who are low in numeracy may be at a disadvantage when making these decisions. This study examined the use of a “spinner†to present probabilistic information compared to a numerical format and icon array. Design. Subjects ( n = 151) were asked to imagine they suffered from chronic back pain. Two equally effective medications, each with a different incidence of rare and common side effects, were described. Subjects were randomized to 1 of 3 risk presentation formats: numeric only, numeric with icon arrays, or numeric with spinners, and answered questions regarding their risk knowledge, medication preference, and how much they liked the presentation format. Results. Compared with the numeric only format, both the spinner and icon array increased risk knowledge and were rated more likeable by subjects. Subjects viewing the spinner format were also more likely to prefer the pill with the lowest side-effect burden. Limitations. The relatively small size, convenience sample, and hypothetical scenario were limitations of this study. Conclusions. The use of continuous spinners presents a new approach for communicating risk to patients that may aid in their decision making.

Keywords: risk communication; numeracy; decision tool; side effect (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X17707198 (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:37:y:2017:i:6:p:725-729

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17707198

Access Statistics for this article

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