Cargando…
Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study
BACKGROUND: Quantitative data reports are widely produced to inform health policy decisions. Policymakers are expected to critically assess provided information in order to incorporate the best available evidence into the decision-making process. Many other factors are known to influence this proces...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7845041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33509172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01401-4 |
_version_ | 1783644475763982336 |
---|---|
author | Wronski, Pamela Wensing, Michel Ghosh, Sucheta Gärttner, Lukas Müller, Wolfgang Koetsenruijter, Jan |
author_facet | Wronski, Pamela Wensing, Michel Ghosh, Sucheta Gärttner, Lukas Müller, Wolfgang Koetsenruijter, Jan |
author_sort | Wronski, Pamela |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Quantitative data reports are widely produced to inform health policy decisions. Policymakers are expected to critically assess provided information in order to incorporate the best available evidence into the decision-making process. Many other factors are known to influence this process, but little is known about how quantitative data reports are actually read. We explored the reading behavior of (future) health policy decision-makers, using innovative methods. METHODS: We conducted a computer-assisted laboratory study, involving starting and advanced students in medicine and health sciences, and professionals as participants. They read a quantitative data report to inform a decision on the use of resources for long-term care in dementia in a hypothetical decision scenario. Data were collected through eye-tracking, questionnaires, and a brief interview. Eye-tracking data were used to generate ‘heatmaps’ and five measures of reading behavior. The questionnaires provided participants’ perceptions of understandability and helpfulness as well as individual characteristics. Interviews documented reasons for attention to specific report sections. The quantitative analysis was largely descriptive, complemented by Pearson correlations. Interviews were analyzed by qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 46 individuals participated [students (85%), professionals (15%)]. Eye-tracking observations showed that the participants spent equal time and attention for most parts of the presented report, but were less focused when reading the methods section. The qualitative content analysis identified 29 reasons for attention to a report section related to four topics. Eye-tracking measures were largely unrelated to participants’ perceptions of understandability and helpfulness of the report. CONCLUSIONS: Eye-tracking data added information on reading behaviors that were not captured by questionnaires or interviews with health decision-makers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7845041 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78450412021-02-01 Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study Wronski, Pamela Wensing, Michel Ghosh, Sucheta Gärttner, Lukas Müller, Wolfgang Koetsenruijter, Jan BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Quantitative data reports are widely produced to inform health policy decisions. Policymakers are expected to critically assess provided information in order to incorporate the best available evidence into the decision-making process. Many other factors are known to influence this process, but little is known about how quantitative data reports are actually read. We explored the reading behavior of (future) health policy decision-makers, using innovative methods. METHODS: We conducted a computer-assisted laboratory study, involving starting and advanced students in medicine and health sciences, and professionals as participants. They read a quantitative data report to inform a decision on the use of resources for long-term care in dementia in a hypothetical decision scenario. Data were collected through eye-tracking, questionnaires, and a brief interview. Eye-tracking data were used to generate ‘heatmaps’ and five measures of reading behavior. The questionnaires provided participants’ perceptions of understandability and helpfulness as well as individual characteristics. Interviews documented reasons for attention to specific report sections. The quantitative analysis was largely descriptive, complemented by Pearson correlations. Interviews were analyzed by qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 46 individuals participated [students (85%), professionals (15%)]. Eye-tracking observations showed that the participants spent equal time and attention for most parts of the presented report, but were less focused when reading the methods section. The qualitative content analysis identified 29 reasons for attention to a report section related to four topics. Eye-tracking measures were largely unrelated to participants’ perceptions of understandability and helpfulness of the report. CONCLUSIONS: Eye-tracking data added information on reading behaviors that were not captured by questionnaires or interviews with health decision-makers. BioMed Central 2021-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7845041/ /pubmed/33509172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01401-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wronski, Pamela Wensing, Michel Ghosh, Sucheta Gärttner, Lukas Müller, Wolfgang Koetsenruijter, Jan Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title | Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title_full | Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title_fullStr | Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title_short | Use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
title_sort | use of a quantitative data report in a hypothetical decision scenario for health policymaking: a computer-assisted laboratory study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7845041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33509172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01401-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wronskipamela useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy AT wensingmichel useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy AT ghoshsucheta useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy AT garttnerlukas useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy AT mullerwolfgang useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy AT koetsenruijterjan useofaquantitativedatareportinahypotheticaldecisionscenarioforhealthpolicymakingacomputerassistedlaboratorystudy |