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.
This is the abstract only. Read the full article on the JMIR site. JMIR is the leading open access journal for eHealth and healthcare in the Internet age.