Healthcare providers’ understanding of data displays of clinical trial information: a scoping review of the literature

ABSTRACT

Background

Healthcare providers often encounter clinical trial results in the form of visual data displays. Although there is a robust literature on patient responses to data displays in medical settings, less is known about how providers comprehend and apply this information. Our study provides a scoping review of the literature on providers’ reactions to and perceptions of data displays.

Methods

We searched article databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library) supplemented by handsearching. Eligible articles were published in English from 1990 to 2020.

Results

We identified 15 articles meeting our criteria. Studies with physicians were more prevalent (13/15) than those with other healthcare providers (6/15). Commonly assessed outcomes included objective (10/15) and subjective comprehension (4/15), preference for certain data display formats (6/15), and hypothetical decision-making around prescribing (4/15). In studies that assessed comprehension of clinical trial concepts, scores were average or below what would be considered mastery of the information. Data display formats that were preferred did not always correlate with better comprehension of information; lesser preferred formats (e.g. icon array) often resulted in better comprehension.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that healthcare providers may not accurately interpret complex types of data displays, and it is unknown if such limitations affect actual decision-making. Interventions are needed to enhance comprehension of complex data displays within the context of prescription drug professional promotion.

KEYWORDS:

• Data displays
• visual
• graphic
• comprehension
• decision-making
• systematic review

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Mark Howell with the RTI Library Information Services for his expertise in conducting searches. This article reflects the views of the author and should not be construed to represent FDA’s views or policies.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethical approval

This project did not require ethical approval from RTI International's Institutional Review Board as it's a review of existing literature.

Additional information

Funding

Financial support for this study was provided entirely by a contract with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The following authors are employed by the sponsor: Kathryn Aikin and Helen Sullivan.

Notes on contributors

Jessica Thompson

Jessica Thompson, PhD, is a Health Behavior Research Scientist with the Center for Communication Science at RTI International. Her research examines decision-making and communication across a variety of health topics.

Micaela Brewington

Micaela Brewington is a Public Health Analyst with RTI Center for Communication Science.

Karen Crotty

Karen Crotty, PhD and Roberta (Candi) Wines, MPH direct RTI’s Evidence to Practice Program, which includes a team of 17 scientists working across a variety of areas including evidence synthesis, implementation science, technical assistance, and program evaluation.

Kathryn J. Aikin

Kathryn J. Aikin is a Senior Social Science Analyst and Team Lead in the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Her research examines the communication of prescription drug information to consumers and healthcare providers.

Helen Sullivan

Helen Sullivan is a Social Science Analyst in OPDP at FDA. Her research examines the communication of prescription drug information to consumers and healthcare providers.