Do visual aids influenced patients' risk perceptions for rare and very rare risks?

• Type of Material: Article
• Authors: Liana Fraenkel, Yale University; Valerie Reyna, Cornell University; Raluca Cozmuta, Emory University; Diana Cornell, Yale University; Julia Nolte, Cornell University; Evan Wilhelms, College of Wooster
• Language: English
• Date: 2018-11-01
• Publisher: Elsevier: 12 months
• Publication Version: Author Accepted Manuscript (After Peer Review)
• Copyright Statement: © 2018 Elsevier B.V.
• License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
• Final Published Version (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2018.06.007
• Title of Journal or Parent Work: Patient Education and Counseling
• ISSN: 0738-3991
• Volume: 101
• Issue: 11
• Start Page: 1900
• End Page: 1905
• Grant/Funding Information: Research reported in this publication was also supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health, under Award Number AR060231–06 (Fraenkel).
• Keywords: HEALTH; Public, Environmental & Occupational Health; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; NUMERACY; COMMUNICATION; Science & Technology; Social Sciences; FORMATS; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary; Risk communication; ILLNESS PERCEPTIONS; COMPREHENSION; MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING; Social Sciences - Other Topics; INTERVENTION; Life Sciences & Biomedicine; Visual aids
• Research Categories: Health Sciences, Public Health; Engineering, Biomedical

Abstract

Objective: To examine whether visual aids (a graphic representation and/or conceptual illustrations) influence patients’ risk perceptions for rare and very rare risks. Methods: Participants were randomized to a scenario which varied by probability of infection (2% or 0.2%) and visual aid: numbers only, numbers + graphic representation, numbers + conceptual illustrations, or numbers + graphic representation + conceptual illustrations. Risk perceptions and likelihood of starting the medication were examined across the four formats, separately, in participants with and without a college education. Results: Adding a graphic representation and/or conceptual illustrations did not affect risk perceptions among those with a higher level of education. Adding both a graphic representation + conceptual illustrations decreased risk perceptions and increased likelihood of starting the medication among participants randomized to the 2%, but not 0.2% scenario, among participants with lower levels of education. Conclusion: Adding a graphic representation + conceptual illustrations to numbers may influence perceptions for rare, but not very rare, risks among patients with lower education. Practice Implications: Clinicians should be aware of the differential effects of visual aids developed to facilitate risk communication. Patients with higher levels of education may be less responsive to visual aids than those with lower education.