Cargando…

Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty is integral to evidence-informed decision making and is of particular importance for preference-sensitive decisions. Communicating uncertainty to patients and the public has long been identified as a goal in the informed and shared decision-making movement. Despite this, ther...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Büchter, Roland Brian, Betsch, Cornelia, Ehrlich, Martina, Fechtelpeter, Dennis, Grouven, Ulrich, Keller, Sabine, Meuer, Regina, Rossmann, Constanze, Waltering, Andreas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31094343
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13425
_version_ 1783421671429898240
author Büchter, Roland Brian
Betsch, Cornelia
Ehrlich, Martina
Fechtelpeter, Dennis
Grouven, Ulrich
Keller, Sabine
Meuer, Regina
Rossmann, Constanze
Waltering, Andreas
author_facet Büchter, Roland Brian
Betsch, Cornelia
Ehrlich, Martina
Fechtelpeter, Dennis
Grouven, Ulrich
Keller, Sabine
Meuer, Regina
Rossmann, Constanze
Waltering, Andreas
author_sort Büchter, Roland Brian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Uncertainty is integral to evidence-informed decision making and is of particular importance for preference-sensitive decisions. Communicating uncertainty to patients and the public has long been identified as a goal in the informed and shared decision-making movement. Despite this, there is little quantitative research on how uncertainty in health information is perceived by readers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to design an experiment to examine how different degrees of uncertainty (Q1) and different types of uncertainty (Q2) impact patients’ perception of treatment effectiveness, the body of evidence, text quality, and hypothetical treatment intention. The experiment also examines whether there is an additive effect when multiple sources of uncertainty are communicated (Q3). METHODS: We developed 8 variations of a research summary set in a hypothetical scenario for a treatment decision in the context of tinnitus. These were modified only in the degree of uncertainty relating to the evidence of the presented treatment. We recruited members of the German public from a Web-based research panel and randomized them to one of 8 variations of the research summary to examine the 3 research questions. The trial was only open to the members of the research panel. The outcomes are perception of the effectiveness of the treatment (primary), certainty in the judgement of treatment effectiveness, perception of the body of evidence relating to the treatment, text quality, and decisional intention (secondary). Outcomes were self-assessed. We aimed to recruit 1500 participants to the trial. The recruitment and data collection was fully automated. Ethical approval was waivered by an ethics committee because of the negligible risk to participants. RESULTS: This protocol is retrospectively published in its original format. In the meantime, the trial was set up and the data collection was completed. Data collection was conducted in May 2018. A total of 1727 eligible panel members were enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal by the end of 2019. In addition, results will be presented at conferences and disseminated among developers of guidance for the development of evidence-based health information and decision aids. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015911; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do? navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015911 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/77zyZTGzk) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13425
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6535974
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65359742019-06-07 Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial Büchter, Roland Brian Betsch, Cornelia Ehrlich, Martina Fechtelpeter, Dennis Grouven, Ulrich Keller, Sabine Meuer, Regina Rossmann, Constanze Waltering, Andreas JMIR Res Protoc Protocol BACKGROUND: Uncertainty is integral to evidence-informed decision making and is of particular importance for preference-sensitive decisions. Communicating uncertainty to patients and the public has long been identified as a goal in the informed and shared decision-making movement. Despite this, there is little quantitative research on how uncertainty in health information is perceived by readers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to design an experiment to examine how different degrees of uncertainty (Q1) and different types of uncertainty (Q2) impact patients’ perception of treatment effectiveness, the body of evidence, text quality, and hypothetical treatment intention. The experiment also examines whether there is an additive effect when multiple sources of uncertainty are communicated (Q3). METHODS: We developed 8 variations of a research summary set in a hypothetical scenario for a treatment decision in the context of tinnitus. These were modified only in the degree of uncertainty relating to the evidence of the presented treatment. We recruited members of the German public from a Web-based research panel and randomized them to one of 8 variations of the research summary to examine the 3 research questions. The trial was only open to the members of the research panel. The outcomes are perception of the effectiveness of the treatment (primary), certainty in the judgement of treatment effectiveness, perception of the body of evidence relating to the treatment, text quality, and decisional intention (secondary). Outcomes were self-assessed. We aimed to recruit 1500 participants to the trial. The recruitment and data collection was fully automated. Ethical approval was waivered by an ethics committee because of the negligible risk to participants. RESULTS: This protocol is retrospectively published in its original format. In the meantime, the trial was set up and the data collection was completed. Data collection was conducted in May 2018. A total of 1727 eligible panel members were enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal by the end of 2019. In addition, results will be presented at conferences and disseminated among developers of guidance for the development of evidence-based health information and decision aids. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015911; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do? navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015911 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/77zyZTGzk) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13425 JMIR Publications 2019-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6535974/ /pubmed/31094343 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13425 Text en ©Roland Brian Büchter, Cornelia Betsch, Martina Ehrlich, Dennis Fechtelpeter, Ulrich Grouven, Sabine Keller, Regina Meuer, Constanze Rossmann, Andreas Waltering. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 13.05.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Protocol
Büchter, Roland Brian
Betsch, Cornelia
Ehrlich, Martina
Fechtelpeter, Dennis
Grouven, Ulrich
Keller, Sabine
Meuer, Regina
Rossmann, Constanze
Waltering, Andreas
Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Communicating Uncertainty From Limitations in Quality of Evidence to the Public in Written Health Information: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort communicating uncertainty from limitations in quality of evidence to the public in written health information: protocol for a web-based randomized controlled trial
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31094343
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13425
work_keys_str_mv AT buchterrolandbrian communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT betschcornelia communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT ehrlichmartina communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT fechtelpeterdennis communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT grouvenulrich communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kellersabine communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT meuerregina communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rossmannconstanze communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT walteringandreas communicatinguncertaintyfromlimitationsinqualityofevidencetothepublicinwrittenhealthinformationprotocolforawebbasedrandomizedcontrolledtrial