Confidence, Self, Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Literacy
Conditions
Keywords
shared decision-making
Brief summary
How health-related information is communicated affects what is understood and might influence how people make decisions and how confident they feel in participating in clinical shared decision-making. The CICERO trial will compare three different communication tools providing information on fictional interventions for a common medical problem (i.e. social anxiety disorder) both in terms of how well interventions work (benefit) and also possible harms associated (risk). The three communication tools (Summary of Findings table, Kilim plot, and Vitruvian plot) differ in how they present information: exclusively written, primarily written and partially graphical, or mixed written and visual. Each participant will be asked to go through one clinical scenario. The investigators will ask participants to familiarise themselves with the tool they have been allocated to (either a plot or a table) and then answer some validated questionnaires to measure how useful and efficient the communication strategy was. The entire study occurs online in a single study session (about 20 minutes). The results of the CICERO trial will inform how to communicate research findings to the general population, facilitating their implementation in clinical shared decision-making.
Interventions
DEVICEVitruvian plot
Visual (magnitude, uncertainty) and written (magnitude) communication tool / interventional decision-making aid tool
DEVICEKilim plot
Visual (uncertainty) and written (magnitude) communication tool / interventional decision-making aid tool
DEVICESummary of findings table
Written (magnitude, uncertainty) communication tool / interventional decision-making aid tool
Sponsors
University of Oxford
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* aged between 18 and 65 years (inclusive)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Decisional Conflict Scale, low literacy version | through study completion, an average of 20 minutes | Higher scores indicate worse outcomes (min = 0; max = 100). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Self-Efficacy scale | through study completion, an average of 20 minutes | Higher scores indicate better outcomes (min = 0; max = 100). |
| Preparation for Decision Making scale | through study completion, an average of 20 minutes | Higher scores indicate better outcomes (min = 0; max = 100). |
| Information comprehension (proportion of participants providing a correct answer) | through study completion, an average of 20 minutes | Participants will be asked to choose one of multiple (fictional) medical interventions based on their characteristics as part of the clinical scenario. The question related to the clinical scenario allows only one correct answer. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of minutes to complete the questionnaire | through study completion, an average of 20 minutes | Automated measurement from the first access to the online questionnaire (first input) to its completion (last input), assessed up to the end of the study (continuous outcome). |
Countries
United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed