Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risk: Suggested best practices and future recommendations
Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risk: Suggested best practices and future recommendations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0272989x07307271
复制
发表时间：
2007-09-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Lipkus, Isaac M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lipkus, Isaac M.
对健康风险的认知会影响医疗决策和健康行为的改变。然而，风险这一概念对于公众来说却是一个难以理解的概念。对风险的认知是否会影响决策和行为通常取决于风险大小（即可能性）信息的传达方式。本文根据专家意见，在可能的情况下提供了使用数字、口头和视觉格式传达健康风险程度的最佳实践。该专家意见基于现有的经验证据、论文和书籍的审查以及与风险沟通专家的咨询。本文还讨论了与独特的风险沟通挑战相关的格式（例如，传达小概率事件、交互）。提出了一些建议，通过以数字和视觉方式呈现风险大小来提高风险感知的准确性。总体而言，几乎没有数据表明风险程度口头沟通的最佳实践。在这 3 种格式中，几乎没有什么总体建议可以提出，因为 1) 在感兴趣的领域中使用相同结果的测试格式缺乏一致性，2) 缺乏使用随机对照研究的关键测试，使格式相互竞争，3) 缺乏详细说明和测试机制的理论进展，说明为什么一种格式在特定背景下应该比其他格式更有效地影响风险程度。未来的研究领域有望有助于阐明未来的最佳实践。
Perception of health risk can affect medical decisions and health behavior change. Yet the concept of risk is a difficult one for the public to grasp. Whether perceptions of risk affect decisions and behaviors often relies on how messages of risk magnitudes (i.e., likelihood) are conveyed. Based on expert opinion, this article offers, when possible, best practices for conveying magnitude of health risks using numeric, verbal, and visual formats. This expert opinion is based on existing empirical evidence, review of papers and books, and consultations with experts in risk communication. This article also discusses formats to use pertaining to unique risk communicution challenges (e.g., conveying small-probability events, interactions). Several recommendations are suggested for enhancing precision in perception of risk by presenting risk magnitudes numerically and visually. Overall, there are little data to suggest best practices for verbal communication of risk magnitudes. Across the 3 formats, few overall recommendations could be suggested because of 1) lack of consistency in testing formats using the same outcomes in the domain of interest, 2) lack of critical tests using randomized controlled studies pitting formats against one another, and 3) lack of theoretical progress detailing and testing mechanisms why one format should be more efficacious in a specific context to affect risk magnitudes than others. Areas of future research are provided that it is hoped will help illuminate future best practices.