Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: May 15, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: May 17, 2018 - Jun 27, 2018
Date Accepted: Jul 10, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Improving the Understanding of Test Results by Substituting (Not Adding) Goal Ranges: Web-Based Between-Subjects Experiment

Scherer AM, Witteman HO, Solomon J, Exe NL, Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ

Improving the Understanding of Test Results by Substituting (Not Adding) Goal Ranges: Web-Based Between-Subjects Experiment

J Med Internet Res 2018;20(10):e11027

DOI: 10.2196/11027

PMID: 30341053

PMCID: 6231727

Improving the Understanding of Test Results by Substituting (Not Adding) Goal Ranges: Web-Based Between-Subjects Experiment

  • Aaron M Scherer; 
  • Holly O Witteman; 
  • Jacob Solomon; 
  • Nicole L Exe; 
  • Angela Fagerlin; 
  • Brian J Zikmund-Fisher

ABSTRACT

Background:

Most displays of laboratory test results include a standard reference range. For some patients (eg, those with chronic conditions), however, getting a result within the standard range may be unachievable, inappropriate, or even harmful.

Objective:

The objective of our study was to test the impact of including clinically appropriate goal ranges outside the standard range in the visual displays of laboratory test results.

Methods:

Participants (N=6776) from a demographically diverse Web-based panel viewed hypothetical glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) test results (HbA1c either 6.2% or 8.2%) as part of a type 2 diabetes management scenario. Test result visual displays included either a standard range (4.5%-5.7%) only, a goal range (6.5%-7.5%) added to the standard range, or the goal range only. The results were displayed in 1 of the following 3 display formats: (1) a table; (2) a simple, two-colored number line (simple line); or (3) a number line with diagnostic categories indicated via colored blocks (block line). Primary outcome measures were comprehension of and negative reactions to test results.

Results:

While goal range information did not influence the understanding of HbA1c=8.2% results, the goal range only display produced higher levels of comprehension and decreased negative reactions to HbA1c=6.2% test results compared with the no goal range and goal range added conditions. Goal range information was less helpful in the block line condition versus the other formats.

Conclusions:

Replacing the standard range with a clinically appropriate goal range could help patients better understand how their test results relate to their personal targets.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Scherer AM, Witteman HO, Solomon J, Exe NL, Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ

Improving the Understanding of Test Results by Substituting (Not Adding) Goal Ranges: Web-Based Between-Subjects Experiment

J Med Internet Res 2018;20(10):e11027

DOI: 10.2196/11027

PMID: 30341053

PMCID: 6231727

Per the author's request the PDF is not available.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.