Cheryl,
I would refer you to an article by Lipkus IM and Holland JG.
You will find a lot of reference under both authors.
Unique Identifier 10854471
Medline Identifier 20314223
Authors Lipkus IM. Hollands JG.
Institution I. M. Lipkus, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. [log in to unmask]
Title The visual communication of risk. [Review] [95 refs]
Source Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs. (25):149-63, 1999.
Abstract This paper 1) provides reasons why graphics should be effective aids to communicate risk; 2) reviews the use of visuals, especially graphical displays, to communicate risk; 3) discusses issues to consider when designing graphs to communicate risk; and 4) provides suggestions for future research. Key articles and materials were obtained from MEDLINE(R) and PsychInfo(R) databases, from reference article citations, and from discussion with experts in risk communication. Research has been devoted primarily to communicating risk magnitudes. Among the various graphical displays, the risk ladder appears to be a promising tool for communicating absolute and relative risks. Preliminary evidence suggests that people understand risk information presented in histograms and pie charts. Areas that need further attention include 1) applying theoretical models to the visual communication of risk, 2) testing which graphical displays can be applied best to different risk communicatio!
n tasks (e.g., which graphs best convey absolute or relative risks), 3) communicating risk uncertainty, and 4) testing whether the lay public's perceptions and understanding of risk varies by graphical format and whether the addition of graphical displays improves comprehension substantially beyond numerical or narrative translations of risk and, if so, by how much. There is a need to ascertain the extent to which graphics and other visuals enhance the public's understanding of disease risk to facilitate decision-making and behavioral change processes. Nine suggestions are provided to help achieve these ends. [References: 95]
Best wishes,
Amit K Ghosh, MD, DM,FACP
Co- Program Director,
Assistant Professor of Medicine
General Internal Medicine Research Fellowship, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine
Consultant, Division of General Internal Medicine
W-17 B, GIM
Mayo Clinic
200 First St SW
Rochester, MN 55901
(507)538-1128 *Phone
(507)284-5889 *Fax
[log in to unmask]
> ----------
> From: Cheryl Carling[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: Cheryl Carling
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:09 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Graphical formats for presenting risk
>
> We are undertaking a randomized study in which we will compare graphical
> formats for presenting risk in a scenario for treatment decision making.
> For an outcome O we will show risk evidence for treatment A and treatment B
> at time T . We are considering comparing pie charts, horizontal bar graphs,
> vertical bar graphs, systematic ovals (or faces), random ovals (or faces)
> and line graphs.
>
> I'd appreciate input on other graphical preentations that we ought to
> consider and of course references to study articles that you might be aware
> of would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
> Cheryl Carling
> Dept. for Health Services Research
> Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Welfare
>
|