Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Attorney General Consumer & Prescriber Education Grant | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to test comprehension of five numeric formats used to present data about treatment benefits and harms.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage format only | Experimental | Numbers are presented in percentage format (e.g., 35%, 0.2%) only. |
|
| Fixed frequency format only | Experimental | Numbers are presented in fixed frequency format only (5 out of 1000, 0.6 out of 1000). Denominators remains the same for each number. |
|
| Variable frequency format | Experimental | Frequency denominators are adjusted to keep the numerator greater than 1, so they may change throughout the survey (e.g., 6 out of 1000, 42 out of 100) |
|
| Fixed combination format | Active Comparator | Numbers are presented with both percentages and frequencies, and frequency denominators remain fixed (e.g., _ out of 1000). |
|
| Variable combination format | Experimental | Numbers are presented with both percentages and frequencies, but frequency denominators may vary (e.g., _ out of 1000, _ out of 100). |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presentation of drug efficacy and side effect data | Other | Data presented in 1 of 5 numeric formats in each arm: percentage only, fixed frequency only, variable frequency, variable combination and fixed combination format. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Comprehension questions (e.g., overall direction of effect and specific numeric data) | 0 weeks (assessed during intervention) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Risk perceptions (e.g., how big or small is the benefit)and preferences (e.g., did the box help subjects understand the benefits) assessed via Internet surveys. | 0 weeks (assessed during intervention) |
Not provided
Inclusion criteria
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Lisa M Schwartz, MD, MS | White River Junction Veterans Affairs Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Steven Woloshin, MD, MS | White River Junction Veterans Affairs Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19221371 | Background | Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Using a drug facts box to communicate drug benefits and harms: two randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Apr 21;150(8):516-27. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-150-8-200904210-00106. Epub 2009 Feb 16. | |
| 17873258 | Background | Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. The drug facts box: providing consumers with simple tabular data on drug benefit and harm. Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):655-62. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07306786. Epub 2007 Sep 14. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| 21768582 | Derived | Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. Communicating data about the benefits and harms of treatment: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jul 19;155(2):87-96. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00004. |