[Portocaval emergency shunt in severe esophageal varices hemorrhage].

R. Häring,U. Baer,B. Stallkamp,L. Tung

1976-05-14

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Visualizing machine learning-based predictions of postpartum depression risk for lay audiences

Pooja M Desai,Sarah Harkins,Saanjaana Rahman,Shiveen Kumar,Alison Hermann,Rochelle Joly,Yiye Zhang,Jyotishman Pathak,Jessica Kim,Deborah D'Angelo,Natalie C Benda,Meghan Reading Turchioe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad198

2024-01-18

Abstract:Objectives: To determine if different formats for conveying machine learning (ML)-derived postpartum depression risks impact patient classification of recommended actions (primary outcome) and intention to seek care, perceived risk, trust, and preferences (secondary outcomes). Materials and methods: We recruited English-speaking females of childbearing age (18-45 years) using an online survey platform. We created 2 exposure variables (presentation format and risk severity), each with 4 levels, manipulated within-subject. Presentation formats consisted of text only, numeric only, gradient number line, and segmented number line. For each format viewed, participants answered questions regarding each outcome. Results: Five hundred four participants (mean age 31 years) completed the survey. For the risk classification question, performance was high (93%) with no significant differences between presentation formats. There were main effects of risk level (all P < .001) such that participants perceived higher risk, were more likely to agree to treatment, and more trusting in their obstetrics team as the risk level increased, but we found inconsistencies in which presentation format corresponded to the highest perceived risk, trust, or behavioral intention. The gradient number line was the most preferred format (43%). Discussion and conclusion: All formats resulted high accuracy related to the classification outcome (primary), but there were nuanced differences in risk perceptions, behavioral intentions, and trust. Investigators should choose health data visualizations based on the primary goal they want lay audiences to accomplish with the ML risk score.
Influence of Cardiovascular Risk Communication Tools and Presentation Formats on Patient Perceptions and Preferences

Ann Marie Navar,Tracy Y Wang,Xiaojuan Mi,Jennifer G Robinson,Salim S Virani,Veronique L Roger,Peter W F Wilson,Anne C Goldberg,Eric D Peterson,Tracy Y. Wang,Jennifer G. Robinson,Salim S. Virani,Veronique L. Roger,Peter W. F. Wilson,Anne C. Goldberg,Eric D. Peterson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2018.3680

2018-12-01

JAMA Cardiology

Abstract:Importance: Practice guidelines recommend that clinicians engage patients in treatment decisions and explain atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk but do not describe how to communicate this risk most effectively.Objective: To determine how the ASCVD risk time horizon, outcome, and presentation format influence risk perceptions and treatment preferences.Design, Setting, and Participants: From May 27, 2015, through November 12, 2015, participants from the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management Registry at 140 US cardiology, primary care, and endocrinology practices were presented 3 independent scenarios (representing the same hypothetical patient) and asked to rate their perceived risk and willingness to take medication to lower risk in light of (1) a 15% 10-year ASCVD event risk, (2) a 4% 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) death risk, and (3) a 50% lifetime ASCVD event risk.Exposures: Participants were randomized to receive risk estimates using numbers only, a bar graph, or a face pictogram.Results: Of 3566 eligible participants, 2708 (76.9%) responded (median age, 67 years [interquartile range, 61-76 years]; 280 [10.3%] African American; 1491 men [55.1%]). When shown the lifetime ASCVD risk, respondents were more likely to consider the risk "high to very high" than when presented the 10-year ASCVD risk or the CVD death risk (70.1% vs 31.4% vs 25.7%, respectively; both P < .001). Treatment willingness was also the highest for lifetime ASCVD risk (77.9% very willing) followed by 10-year ASCVD risk (68.1%) and 10-year CVD death risk (63.1%; both P < .001). Compared with participants who were shown a bar graph or no graphic, those who were shown the risk information with a pictogram had the lowest perception of disease severity and the lowest willingness to consider therapy. These findings were robust across demographic and socioeconomic subgroups.Conclusions and Relevance: The format, time horizon, and outcome used for risk estimation influence patient perceptions and should be considered when designing risk communication tools. When shown lifetime risk estimates, patients had higher risk perception and willingness for therapy than when shown 10-year estimates. Pictogram risk displays may decrease risk perception and consideration for treatment.

medicine, general & internal
Temporal trends in bisphenol A exposure in the United States from 2003-2012 and factors associated with BPA exposure: Spot samples and urine dilution complicate data interpretation.

J. LaKind,D. Naiman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2015.06.013

IF: 8.3

2015-10-01

Environmental Research

Abstract:
Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review

Arif Hanafi Bin Jalal,Despoina Chatzopoulou,Hani J Marcus,Anand S Pandit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12142

IF: 3.282

2024-03-21

World Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Background Informed consent is an essential process in clinical decision‐making, through which healthcare providers educate patients about benefits, risks, and alternatives of a procedure. Statistical risk information is difficult to communicate and the effectiveness of aids aimed at supporting this type of communication is uncertain. This systematic review aims to study the impact of risk communication adjuncts on patients' understanding of statistical risk in surgery and interventional procedures. Methods A systematic search was performed across Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 2021 with a repeated search in September 2022. RCTs and observational studies examining risk communication tools (e.g., information leaflets and audio‐video) in adult (age >16) patients undergoing a surgical or interventional procedure were included. Primary outcomes included the objective assessment of statistical risk recall. Secondary outcomes included patient attitudes with respect to statistical information. Due to the study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed. Results A total of 4348 articles were identified, and following abstract and full‐text screening 14 articles, including 9 RCTs, were included. The total number of adult patients was 1513. The most common risk communication tool used was written information (n = 7). Most RCTs (7/9, 77.8%) showed statistically significant improvements in patient understanding of statistical risk in the intervention group. Quality assessment found some concerns with all RCTs. Conclusion Risk communication tools appear to improve recall of statistical risk. Additional prospective trials comparing various aids simultaneously are warranted to determine the most effective method of improving understanding.

surgery
Communicating Risk in Imaging: A Scoping Review of Risk Presentation in Patient Decision Aids

Trey A Baird,Melissa Previtera,Samuel Brady,Davene R Wright,Andrew T Trout,Shireen E Hayatghaibi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.05.014

2024-10-18

Abstract:Purpose: Best practices exist for communicating medical information to patients, but there is less emphasis on methods to communicate risks, especially in medical imaging. The authors conducted a scoping review of patient decision aids in medical imaging and characterized the presentation methods of imaging risks. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsychINFO were searched to identify studies involving patient decision aids used in diagnostic imaging that communicated the risks. Study characteristics included the number and types of risks included, as well as the presentation type and how the probability of risks were communicated. Results: The final study included 46 articles encompassing 27 distinct patient decision aids. Mammography was the most common imaging scenario (22 of 46), followed by lung cancer screening (18 of 46), traumatic brain injury (5 of 46), and urolithiasis (1 of 46). All patient decision aids included risks associated with imaging, but the number of risk types varied from two to nine (mean, 4 ± 2). Twelve risks were identified across the 27 decision aids, but no single study included all risks. Overall, most risks (65%) were communicated with text, and the presentation mode varied by type of risk. False-positive risks were most commonly communicated using a visual format, whereas radiation risk was most commonly communicated using text format. Conclusions: There was no consistent manner of communicating risk to patients, and visual methods such as icon arrays were not consistently used. The variability of both included risks and the risk presentation modes in the patient decision aids may affect decision making, especially among patients and caregivers with lower health literacy and numeracy.
Using Separate Single-Outcome Risk Presentations Instead of Integrated Multioutcome Formats Improves Comprehension in Discrete Choice Experiments

Matthew J. Wallace,E. Hope Weissler,Jui-Chen Yang,Laura Brotzman,Matthew A. Corriere,Eric A. Secemsky,Jessie Sutphin,F. Reed Johnson,Juan Marcos Gonzalez,Michelle E. Tarver,Anindita Saha,Allen L. Chen,David J. Gebben,Misti Malone,Andrew Farb,Olufemi Babalola,Eva M. Rorer,Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher,Shelby D. Reed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x241258466

2024-06-22

Medical Decision Making

Abstract:Medical Decision Making, Ahead of Print. IntroductionDespite decades of research on risk-communication approaches, questions remain about the optimal methods for conveying risks for different outcomes across multiple time points, which can be necessary in applications such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs). We sought to compare the effects of 3 design factors: 1) separated versus integrated presentations of the risks for different outcomes, 2) use or omission of icon arrays, and 3) vertical versus horizontal orientation of the time dimension.MethodsWe conducted a randomized study among a demographically diverse sample of 2,242 US adults recruited from an online panel (mean age 59.8 y, s = 10.4 y; 21.9% African American) that compared risk-communication approaches that varied in the 3 factors noted above. The primary outcome was the number of correct responses to 12 multiple-choice questions asking survey respondents to identify specific numbers, contrast options to recognize dominance (larger v. smaller risks), and compute differences. We used linear regression to test the effects of the 3 design factors, controlling for health literacy, graph literacy, and numeracy. We also measured choice consistency in a subsequent DCE choice moduleResultsMean comprehension varied significantly across versions (P < 0.001), with higher comprehension in the 3 versions that provided separated risk information for each risk. In the multivariable regression, separated risk presentation was associated with 0.58 more correct responses (P < 0.001; 95% confidence interval: 0.39, 0.77) compared with integrated risk information. Neither providing icon arrays nor using vertical versus horizontal time formats affected comprehension rates, although participant understanding did correlate with DCE choice consistency.ConclusionsIn presentations of multiple risks over multiple time points, presenting risk information separately for each health outcome appears to increase understanding.HighlightsWhen conveying information about risks of different outcomes at multiple time points, separate presentations of single-outcome risks resulted in higher comprehension than presentations that combined risk information for different outcomes.We also observed benefits of presenting single-outcome risks separately among respondents with lower numeracy and graph literacy.Study participants who scored higher on risk understanding were more internally consistent in their responses to a discrete choice experiment.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics,health policy & services
Microbiomes, metabolic errors and detection of performance enhancing drug abuse1,2.

K. Timmis,J. Timmis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-2229.12498

IF: 4.006

Environmental Microbiology Reports

Abstract:
Improving risk communication: a proof-of-concept randomised control trial assessing the impact of visual aids for neurosurgical consent

Despoina Chatzopoulou,Arif Hanafi Bin Jalal,Danail Stoyanov,Hani J. Marcus,Anand S. Pandit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1361040

IF: 1.8

2024-02-21

Frontiers in Surgery

Abstract:Introduction Informed consent is a fundamental component in the work-up for surgical procedures. Statistical risk information pertaining to a procedure is by nature probabilistic and challenging to communicate, especially to those with poor numerical literacy. Visual aids and audio/video tools have previously been shown to improve patients' understanding of statistical information. In this study, we aimed to explore the impact of different methods of risk communication in healthy participants randomized to either undergo the consent process with visual aids or the standard consent process for lumbar puncture. Material and methods Healthy individuals above 18 years old were eligible. The exclusion criteria were prior experience of the procedure or relevant medical knowledge, lack of capacity to consent, underlying cognitive impairment and hospitalised individuals. After randomisation, both groups received identical medical information about the procedure of a lumbar puncture in a hypothetical clinical scenario via different means of consent. The control group underwent the standard consent process in current clinical practice (Consent Form 1 without any illustrative examples), whereas the intervention group received additional anatomy diagrams, the Paling Palette and the Paling perspective scale. Anonymised questionnaires were received to evaluate their perception of the procedure and its associated risks. Results Fifty-two individuals were eligible without statistically significant differences in age, sex, professional status and the familiarity of the procedure. Visual aids were noted to improve the confidence of participants to describe the risks by themselves ( p = 0.009) and participants in the intervention group felt significantly less overwhelmed with medical information ( p = 0.028). The enhanced consent process was found to be significantly more acceptable by participants ( p = 0.03). There was a trend towards greater appropriateness ( p = 0.06) and it appeared to have “good” usability (median SUS = 76.4), although this also did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.06) Conclusion Visual aids could be an appropriate alternative method for medical consent without being inferior regarding the understanding of the procedure, its risks and its benefits. Future studies could possibly compare or incorporate multiple interventions to determine the most effective tools in a larger scale of population including patients as well as healthy individuals.

surgery
Prenatal Genetic Screening and Diagnostic Testing: Assessing Patients' Knowledge, Clinical Experiences, and Utilized Resources in Comparison to Provider's Perceptions

Arlin Delgado,Jay Schulkin,Charles J. Macri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1742236

2022-01-01

American Journal of Perinatology Reports

Abstract:Abstract Objective This survey study aimed to assess patient knowledge, clinical resources, and utilized resources about genetic screening and diagnostic testing. Study Design A one-time anonymous paper survey was distributed to 500 patients at a major urban obstetrics and gynecology department, and an online survey was sent to 229 providers. Descriptive statistics and chi-squared analyses were performed. Results In all, 466 of 500 patient surveys were completed, and 441 analyzed (88.2% response rate). Among providers, 66 of 229 (29.0% response rate) responded. Patients were on average 32 years old, 27 weeks pregnant, and most often reported a graduate degree level of education (47.4%). Over 75% of patients reported accurate knowledge of basic genetic statements. Patients reported that discussing screening and diagnostic testing with their provider was significantly associated with properly defining screening and diagnostic testing (p < 0.001). Less than 10% of patients reported providers distributing web/video links, books, or any other resource; however, patients most often independently accessed web links (40.1%). Conclusion Our findings suggest a positive impact from patient and provider discussions in office on patient knowledge and understanding. Discrepancies between educational resources distributed in the clinic and individually accessed resources highlight possible areas of change. Future work should evaluate and implement differing resources to increase patient knowledge.
Communicating cardiovascular risk: Systematic review of qualitative evidence

Theo Lorenc,Gillian Stokes,Helen Fulbright,Katy Sutcliffe,Amanda Sowden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2024.108231

IF: 3.467

2024-02-01

Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular risk prediction models are widely used to help individuals understand risk and make decisions.METHODS: Systematic review of qualitative evidence. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We included English-language qualitative studies on the communication of cardiovascular risk. We assessed study quality using Hawker et al.'s tool and synthesised data thematically.RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies were included. Many patients think that risk scores are of limited practical value. Other sources of information feed into informal estimates of risk, which may lead patients to reject the results of clinical risk assessment when the two conflict. Clinicians identify a number of barriers to risk communication, including patients' limited understanding of risk and excessive anxiety. They use a range of strategies for adapting risk communication. Both clinicians and individuals express specific preferences for risk communication formats.DISCUSSION: Ways of communicating risk that provide some comparison or reference point seem more promising. The broader context of communication around risk may be more important than the risk scoring instrument. Risk communication interventions, in practice, may be more about appeals to emotion than a rationalistic model of decision-making.

public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, interdisciplinary
Der Einfluss von Hartz IV auf die westdeutsche Stille Reserve – Ergebnisse auf Basis unterschiedlicher methodischer Ansätze

J. Fuchs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11943-014-0138-5

2014-01-25

Abstract:
Effects of protein nutrition on cell-mediated immunity.

E. Copeland,J. Daly,E. Guinn,S. Dudrick

Abstract:
Are women's breast cancer risk appraisals in line with updated clinical risk estimates communicated? Results from a UK Family History Risk and Prevention Clinic

Victoria G. Woof,Anthony Howell,Lynne Fox,Lorna McWilliams,D. Gareth R. Evans,David P. French

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-24-0581

2024-10-03

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: The incorporation of breast density and a polygenic risk score (PRS) into breast cancer risk prediction models can alter previously communicated risk estimates. Previous research finds that risk communication does not usually change personal risk appraisals. This study aimed to examine how women from the Family History Risk (FH-Risk) study appraise their breast cancer risk following communication of an updated risk estimate. Methods: In the FH-Risk study 323 women attended a consultation to receive an updated breast cancer risk estimate. A subset (n=190) completed a questionnaire, assessing their subjective breast cancer risk appraisals, satisfaction with the information provided and cancer related worry. One hundred and three were notified of a decrease risk, 34 an increase and 53 an unchanged risk. Results: Women's subjective risk appraisals were in line with the updated risk estimates provided, with age, a PRS and breast density explaining most of the variance in these appraisals. Those notified of an increased risk demonstrated higher subjective risk perceptions compared to those whose risk remained unchanged or decreased. Conclusions: Women's subjective breast cancer risk appraisals are amenable to change following updated risk feedback, with new information breast density and a PRS accepted and integrated into existing risk appraisals. Trust in the service, the analogies and visual communication strategies used may have positively influenced the integration of this new information. Impact: Further research is warranted to assess whether similar patterns emerge for other illnesses and in different clinical contexts to determine the best strategies for communicating updated risk estimates.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Development and evaluation of patient-centred polygenic risk score reports for glaucoma screening

Georgina L Hollitt,Mark M Hassall,Owen M Siggs,Jamie E Craig,Emmanuelle Souzeau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.25.24314343

2024-09-26

Abstract:Background: Polygenic risk scores (PRS), which provide an individual probabilistic estimate of genetic susceptibility to develop a disease, have shown effective risk stratification for glaucoma onset. However, there is limited best practice evidence for reporting PRS and patient-friendly reports for communicating effectively PRS are lacking. Here we developed patient-centred PRS reports for glaucoma screening based on the literature and evaluated them with participants using a qualitative research approach. Methods: We first reviewed existing PRS reports and literature on probabilistic risk communication. This informed the development of a draft glaucoma screening PRS report for a hypothetical high risk individual from the general population. We designed three versions of the report to illustrate risk using a pictograph, a pie chart and a bell curve. We then conducted semi-structured interviews to assess preference of visual risk communication aids, understanding of risk, content, format and structure of the reports. Participants were invited from an existing study, which aims to evaluate the clinical validity of glaucoma among individuals >50 years from the general population. Numeracy and literacy levels were assessed. Results: We interviewed 12 individuals (50% female, 42% university education). Numeracy (mean 2.1+/-0.9, range 0-3), graph literacy (mean 2.8+/-0.8, range 0-4) and genetic literacy (mean 24.2+/-6.2, range -20-+46) showed a range of levels. We analysed the reports under three main themes: visual preferences, understanding risk and reports formatting. The visual component was deemed important to understanding risk, with the pictograph being the preferred visual risk representation, followed by the pie chart and the bell curve. Participants expressed preference for absolute risk in understanding risk, along with the written content explaining the results. The importance of follow-up recommendations and time to glaucoma onset were highlighted. Participants expressed varied opinions in the level of information and the colours used, which informed revisions of the report. Conclusions: Our study revealed preferences for reporting PRS information in the context of glaucoma screening, to support the development of clinical PRS reporting. Further research is needed to assess PRS communication in other contexts and with other target audiences (e.g. referring clinicians), and its potential psychosocial impact in the wider community.
Impact of graphical display on the intention to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy in individuals positive for BRCA pathogenic variant

Yoon-Jung Choi,Younju Park,Boyoung Park,Heejung Chae,So-Youn Jung,Kum Hei Ryu,Myong Cheol Lim,Soo Jin Park,Yoon Jung Chang,Sun-Young Kong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-73929-0

2024-10-16

Abstract:The BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) increases the risk of breast and ovarian cancer; thus, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and mastectomy (RRM) are recommended. We evaluated the effects of the graphical display of cancer risk compared with those of numerical presentation on the decision-making for risk-reducing (RR) surgery. A total of 471 women representing the Korean population were recruited. The lifetime risk of breast/ovarian cancer were given numerically followed by graphically in hypothetical BRCA1/2 PV-positive cases. Subsequently, the study participants were asked for their willingness to undergo RRSO/RRM. When the ovarian cancer risk was shown as 44.0%, the percentage of study participants who chose RRSO was 41.0% after numerical presentation versus 39.9% after graphical display, of which the difference was not significant. When the breast cancer risk was presented as 72.0%, 30.4% of the participants opted for RRM under numerical presentation, whereas this increased to 38.6% under graphical display, of which the difference was significant (p < 0.0075). The average levels of the cancer risk which study participants consider RR surgery were 57.1% for ovarian cancer and 60.6% for breast cancer. This suggests that the impacts of different formats of risk communication on decision about RRSO or RRM may be different by the absolute levels of ovarian or breast cancer.
Numbers, graphs and words - do we really understand the lab test results accessible via the patient portals?

Shirly Bar-Lev,Dizza Beimel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-020-00415-z

2020-10-28

Abstract:Background: The heavy reliance on remote patient care (RPC) during the COVID-19 health crisis may have expedited the emergence of digital health tools that can contribute to safely and effectively moving the locus of care from the hospital to the community. Understanding how laypersons interpret the personal health information accessible to them via electronic patient records (EPRs) is crucial to healthcare planning and the design of services. Yet we still know little about how the format in which personal medical information is presented in the EPR (numerically, verbally, or graphically) affects individuals' understanding of the information, their assessment of its gravity, and the course of action they choose in response. Methods: We employed an online questionnaire to assess respondents' reactions to 10 medical decision-making scenarios, where the same information was presented using different formats. In each scenario, respondents were presented with real (anonymized) patient lab results using either numeric expressions, graphs, or verbal expressions. Participants were asked to assess the gravity of the hypothetical patient's condition and the course of action they would follow if they were that patient. The questionnaire was distributed to more than 300 participants, of whom 225 submitted usable responses. Results: Laypersons were more likely to overestimate the gravity of the information when it was presented either numerically or graphically compared to the narrative format. High perceived gravity was most likely to produce an inclination to actively seek medical attention, even when unwarranted. "Don't know" responses were most likely to produce an inclination to either search the Internet or wait for the doctor to call. Policy recommendations: We discuss the study's implications for the effective design of lab results in the patient portals. We suggest (1) that graphs, tables, and charts would be easier to interpret if coupled with a brief verbal explanation; (2) that highlighting an overall level of urgency may be more helpful than indicating a diversion from the norm; and (3) that statements of results should include the type of follow-up required.
A better lens on disease.

M. May

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/SCIENTIFICAMERICAN0510-74

2010-05-01

Scientific American

Abstract:
Evaluating an approach for communicating integrated risk scores for melanoma

Courtney K. Wallingford,Adam Mothershaw,Clare Primiero,Tenielle Clinch,Tamara Dawson,Nathan Ingold,H. Peter Soyer,Matthew H. Law,Aideen McInerney-Leo,Tatiane Yanes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-024-01750-4

2024-11-30

European Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract:Integrated risk scores (polygenic and non-genetic risk factors) can facilitate risk-stratification, to inform targeted melanoma screening. This mixed-methods pilot study assessed satisfaction, attitudes, and psychosocial impact of a protocol for communicating integrated risk for melanoma using questionnaires (baseline and 1-month post-results) and semi-structured interviews. Affected and unaffected adults enroled in ongoing melanoma studies were recruited to receive their integrated risk booklets and attend a genetic counselling appointment. 35/73 consented to participate; 31 and 33 completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires, respectively. Participants rated the information as useful, felt it motivated favourable health behaviours and were satisfied with the quality and content of the booklet. All participants felt highly empowered managing melanoma risk at baseline and follow-up. Most participants were unsure or felt little to no control over preventing future melanomas, which did not change at follow-up (Chi-square p = 0.73). Genetic-specific distress, and uncertainty was low for all participants post-results. Qualitative interviews supported quantitative findings and highlighted importance of access to a clinician for results interpretation and risk-management. In this high-risk cohort, the communication model was acceptable, and did not result in negative psychosocial sequelae. Findings from this study highlight key considerations for effective communication and delivery of integrated risk which can be used to inform future research in more diverse cohorts for melanoma and other common conditions.

genetics & heredity,biochemistry & molecular biology
The risk tolerance and decision‐making processes of Australian women regarding medication trials in pregnancy

Eva Quattrini,Demelza J. Ireland,Jeffrey A. Keelan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13884

2024-09-29

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Abstract:Background Pregnant women have historically been excluded from participation in medication trials, in part due to the perceived risks of drug exposure to mothers and fetuses. However, little is known about pregnant women's attitudes toward risk and participation in such trials. Aims To address this knowledge gap and to identify factors that influence trial participation. Materials and methods Australian women over the age of 18, currently pregnant or within six months of delivery, were recruited to participate in an online survey ( n = 623) and follow‐up interviews ( n = 11). The survey investigated willingness to participate in five hypothetical drug trial scenarios of varying risk. Demographic and obstetric information, including COVID‐19 vaccination status, was also collected. The impact of these factors on trial participation was analysed using ordinal regression. Interviews were subjected to thematic framework analysis using a priori and emergent themes. Results Nearly half of the respondents (48%) indicated a willingness to participate in at least one of the hypothetical trials. As trial risk increased participation likelihood decreased, especially if the risk was to the fetus, regardless of benefits to the mother. COVID‐19 vaccination status and medication hesitancy were predictors of an unwillingness to participate. Three broad themes emerged from the qualitative data: risk–benefit analysis, quality of evidence, and trust. Conclusions Overall, participants expressed a positive attitude toward research and medication trials during pregnancy, but were concerned about fetal risk. The findings of this study may help enhance trial design and the participation of pregnant women in medication trials.

obstetrics & gynecology
How Do Australians Manage Diagnostic Testing Risks? Focus Groups Linked to a Model of Behaviour Change

Tomas Rozbroj,Catriona Parker,Romi Haas,Jason A. Wallis,Rachelle Buchbinder,Denise A. O'Connor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.70038

2024-10-03

Health Expectations

Abstract:Background Diagnostic tests carry significant risks, and communications are needed to help lay people consider these. The development of communications has been hindered by poor knowledge about how lay people understand and negotiate testing risks. We examined lay Australians' perceptions of diagnostic testing risks and how these risks are managed. Method We completed 12 semistructured online focus groups with 61 Australian adults (18+) between April and June 2022. Participants were divided into younger/older (> 50 years) and male/female groups. Using semistructured discussion and exploring two hypothetical scenarios, we examined attitudes to diagnostic tests, their risks and how test risks were managed. Themes were identified, subanalysed to identify age and gender differences and mapped to the COM‐B model of behaviour change. Results The six themes provided detailed accounts of how participants considered themselves able, empowered and assertive when negotiating testing risks and of complex ways in which relationships with health workers, personal experiences and structural factors influenced negotiating testing risks. COM‐B identified multiple opportunities for leveraging these lay beliefs in health promotion. It also identified barriers, including narrow concepts of testing risks, challenges during shared decision‐making and overestimation of personal influence on testing decisions. Significance Our findings matter because they are a novel, detailed account of testing risk beliefs, linked to a model for behaviour change. This will directly inform development of test risk/benefit communications, which are a research priority. Public Contribution The study design enabled participants to influence the discussion agenda, and they could comment on the analysis. Participants contributed insights about their needs, beliefs and experiences related to medical testing, and these will be used to shape future patient‐centred decision tools.

public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,health policy & services

[Portocaval emergency shunt in severe esophageal varices hemorrhage].

Visualizing machine learning-based predictions of postpartum depression risk for lay audiences

Influence of Cardiovascular Risk Communication Tools and Presentation Formats on Patient Perceptions and Preferences

Temporal trends in bisphenol A exposure in the United States from 2003-2012 and factors associated with BPA exposure: Spot samples and urine dilution complicate data interpretation.

Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review

Communicating Risk in Imaging: A Scoping Review of Risk Presentation in Patient Decision Aids

Using Separate Single-Outcome Risk Presentations Instead of Integrated Multioutcome Formats Improves Comprehension in Discrete Choice Experiments

Microbiomes, metabolic errors and detection of performance enhancing drug abuse1,2.

Improving risk communication: a proof-of-concept randomised control trial assessing the impact of visual aids for neurosurgical consent

Prenatal Genetic Screening and Diagnostic Testing: Assessing Patients' Knowledge, Clinical Experiences, and Utilized Resources in Comparison to Provider's Perceptions

Communicating cardiovascular risk: Systematic review of qualitative evidence

Der Einfluss von Hartz IV auf die westdeutsche Stille Reserve – Ergebnisse auf Basis unterschiedlicher methodischer Ansätze

Effects of protein nutrition on cell-mediated immunity.

Are women's breast cancer risk appraisals in line with updated clinical risk estimates communicated? Results from a UK Family History Risk and Prevention Clinic

Development and evaluation of patient-centred polygenic risk score reports for glaucoma screening

Impact of graphical display on the intention to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy in individuals positive for BRCA pathogenic variant

Numbers, graphs and words - do we really understand the lab test results accessible via the patient portals?

A better lens on disease.

Evaluating an approach for communicating integrated risk scores for melanoma

The risk tolerance and decision‐making processes of Australian women regarding medication trials in pregnancy

How Do Australians Manage Diagnostic Testing Risks? Focus Groups Linked to a Model of Behaviour Change