Background: Patient-facing displays of laboratory test results typically provide patients with one reference point (the “standard range”). Objective: To test the effect of including an additional harm anchor reference point in visual displays of laboratory test results, which indicates how far outside of the standard range values would need to be in order to suggest substantial patient risk. Methods: Using a demographically diverse, online sample, we compared the reactions of 1618 adults in the United States who viewed visual line displays that included both standard range and harm anchor reference points (“Many doctors are not concerned until here”) to displays that included either (1) only a standard range, (2) standard range plus evaluative categories (eg, “borderline high”), or (3) a color gradient showing degree of deviation from the standard range. Results: Providing the harm anchor reference point significantly reduced perceived urgency of close-to-normal alanine aminotransferase and creatinine results (P values <.001 but not generally for platelet count results. notably display type did significantly alter perceptions of more extreme results in potentially harmful ranges. harm anchors also substantially reduced the number participants who wanted to contact their doctor urgently or go hospital about these test conclusions: presenting patients with evaluative cues regarding when become clinically concerning can reduce perceived urgency out-of-range that do require immediate clinical action.>
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.