How to present economic evaluations to non-technical audiences? Randomized trials with professionals and the general population

被引:0
作者
Linertova, Renata [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hernandez-Yumar, Aranzazu [1 ,2 ]
Guirado-Fuentes, Carmen [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Rodriguez-Diaz, Benjamin [1 ,2 ]
Valcarcel-Nazco, Cristina [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Imaz-Iglesia, Inaki [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Carmona-Rodriguez, Montserrat [2 ,3 ,5 ]
Garcia-Perez, Lidia [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Fdn Canaria Inst Invest Sanitaria Canarias FIISC, Santa Cruz De Tenerife, Spain
[2] Red Espanola Agencias Evaluac Tecnol Sanitarias &, Madrid, Spain
[3] Red Invest Cronicidad Atenc Primaria & Prevenc & P, Madrid, Spain
[4] Inst Salud Carlos III ISCIII, Escuela Nacl Sanidad ENS, Madrid, Spain
[5] Inst Salud Carlos III ISCIII, Agencia Evaluac Tecnol Sanitarias AETS, Madrid, Spain
关键词
Comprehension; Usefulness; Acceptability; Economic evaluation; Format; Plain language summary; Policy brief; Infographic; Video-abstract; Executive summary; DECISION-MAKING; POLICY-MAKERS; FORMAT;
D O I
10.1186/s13690-024-01453-8
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
BackgroundCost-effectiveness analyses of health technologies have become a part of the decision-making process in healthcare policies. Nevertheless, economic results are not always presented in comprehensible formats for non-technical audiences, such as the general population, healthcare professionals or decision-makers. The purpose of this study was to observe which formats best convey the key message of an economic evaluation, and which are best received by two different audiences.MethodsThe summary of a hypothetical cost-effectiveness analysis was edited in different formats: infographic, plain language text and video-abstract for the general population; executive summary and policy brief for a specialized population, i.e. clinicians, clinical and non-clinical managers, or methodologists in health-technology assessment. Participants were randomly shown one of the formats, and data on objective and subjective comprehension, and perceived usefulness/acceptability were gathered by means of online questionnaires. Statistical differences between formats within each audience were analysed.ResultsIn the general population (N = 324), objective comprehension was statistically significantly better for infographic than for video-abstract (p = 0.005), and for plain text than for video-abstract (p = 0.024). There were no differences in subjective comprehension, but video-abstract was considered statistically significantly more useful to understand the information than plain text (p = 0.011). In the specialized population (N = 100), no statistically significant differences were observed for objective and subjective comprehension, although policy brief was perceived as statistically significantly more useful than executive summary (p = 0.005).ConclusionsA balance between effectivity of conveying the message and attractivity of the format needs to be sought, to facilitate non-technical audiences' understanding of economic data and, consequently, perceive decision-making processes as more transparent and legitimate. The infographic and policy brief could be robust ways to present economic data to the general public and specialized audience, respectively.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Sometimes more is more: iterative participatory design of infographics for engagement of community members with varying levels of health literacy [J].
Arcia, Adriana ;
Suero-Tejeda, Niurka ;
Bales, Michael E. ;
Merrill, Jacqueline A. ;
Yoon, Sunmoo ;
Woollen, Janet ;
Bakken, Suzanne .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2016, 23 (01) :174-183
[2]   Using a multimedia presentation to improve patient understanding and satisfaction with informed consent for minimally invasive vascular procedures [J].
Bowers, N. ;
Eisenberg, E. ;
Montbriand, J. ;
Jaskolka, J. ;
Roche-Nagle, G. .
SURGEON-JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGES OF SURGEONS OF EDINBURGH AND IRELAND, 2017, 15 (01) :7-11
[3]   Video abstracts and plain language summaries are more effective than graphical abstracts and published abstracts [J].
Bredbenner, Kate ;
Simon, Sanford M. .
PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (11)
[4]   No difference in knowledge obtained from infographic or plain language summary of a Cochrane systematic review: three randomized controlled trials [J].
Buljan, Ivan ;
Malicki, Mario ;
Wager, Elizabeth ;
Puljak, Livia ;
Hren, Darko ;
Kellie, Frances ;
West, Helen ;
Alfirevic, Zarko ;
Marusic, Ana .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 97 :86-94
[5]   A framework for production of systematic review based briefings to support evidence-informed decision-making [J].
Chambers D. ;
Wilson P. .
Systematic Reviews, 1 (1)
[6]   Do economic evaluations have a role in decision-making in Medicine Management Committees? A qualitative study [J].
Chen, Li-Chia ;
Ashcroft, Darren M. ;
Elliott, Rachel A. .
PHARMACY WORLD & SCIENCE, 2007, 29 (06) :661-670
[7]  
Cochrane Training Internet, Infographics
[8]   Impact of Game-Inspired Infographics on User Engagement and Information Processing in an eHealth Program [J].
Comello, Maria Leonora G. ;
Qian, Xiaokun ;
Deal, Allison M. ;
Ribisl, Kurt M. ;
Linnan, Laura A. ;
Tate, Deborah F. .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2016, 18 (09)
[9]   Preferences of Knowledge Users for Two Formats of Summarizing Results from Systematic Reviews: Infographics and Critical Appraisals [J].
Crick, Katelynn ;
Hartling, Lisa .
PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (10)
[10]   THE INFLUENCE OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND OTHER FACTORS ON NICE DECISIONS [J].
Dakin, Helen ;
Devlin, Nancy ;
Feng, Yan ;
Rice, Nigel ;
O'Neill, Phill ;
Parkin, David .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2015, 24 (10) :1256-1271