How to Communicate Treatment Effectiveness for Chronic Diseases
Author Information
Author(s): Henrik Stovring, Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, Ivar S. Kristiansen, Jorgen Nexoe, Jesper B. Nielsen
Primary Institution: University of Southern Denmark
Hypothesis
Which single format for conveying treatment effectiveness leads to decisions that align with those made using comprehensive information?
Conclusion
The absolute risk reduction format led to the highest concordance with decisions based on comprehensive information, but differences among formats were small.
Supporting Evidence
- 52%–79% of respondents consented to treatment based on different formats of information.
- ARR format showed the highest concordance at 94%.
- Participants were incentivized with wine or chocolate for their participation.
Takeaway
Doctors need to find the best way to explain treatment options to patients, and using absolute risk reduction seems to help patients make better decisions.
Methodology
A randomized study with 1,169 subjects aged 40-59 who were presented with different formats of treatment effectiveness information.
Potential Biases
Potential biases due to the non-patient status of participants and the influence of other factors on decision-making.
Limitations
The study's low participation rate and the fact that participants were not actual patients may limit generalizability.
Participant Demographics
Subjects were aged 40-59, with a higher proportion of women and a median age of 51.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
94% (91%; 97%) for ARR concordance
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website