Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 7;29(11):1838-1846.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocac148.

Comprehension, utility, and preferences of prostate cancer survivors for visual timelines of patient-reported outcomes co-designed for limited graph literacy: meters and emojis over comics

Affiliations

Comprehension, utility, and preferences of prostate cancer survivors for visual timelines of patient-reported outcomes co-designed for limited graph literacy: meters and emojis over comics

Lauren E Snyder et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: Visual timelines of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) can help prostate cancer survivors manage longitudinal data, compare with population averages, and consider future trajectories. PRO visualizations are most effective when designed with deliberate consideration of users. Yet, graph literacy is often overlooked as a design constraint, particularly when users with limited graph literacy are not engaged in their development. We conducted user testing to assess comprehension, utility, and preference of longitudinal PRO visualizations designed for prostate cancer survivors with limited literacy.

Materials and methods: Building upon our prior work co-designing longitudinal PRO visualizations with survivors, we engaged 18 prostate cancer survivors in a user study to assess 4 prototypes: Meter, Words, Comic, and Emoji. During remote sessions, we collected data on prototype comprehension (gist and verbatim), utility, and preference.

Results: Participants were aged 61-77 (M = 69), of whom half were African American. The majority of participants had less than a college degree (95%), had inadequate health literacy (78%), and low graph literacy (89%). Among the 4 prototypes, Meter had the best gist comprehension and was preferred. Emoji was also preferred, had the highest verbatim comprehension, and highest rated utility, including helpfulness, confidence, and satisfaction. Meter and Words both rated mid-range for utility, and Words scored lower than Emoji and Meter for comprehension. Comic had the poorest comprehension, lowest utility, and was least preferred.

Discussion: Findings identify design considerations for PRO visualizations, contributing to the knowledge base for visualization best practices. We describe our process to meaningfully engage patients from diverse and hard-to-reach groups for remote user testing, an important endeavor for health equity in biomedical informatics.

Conclusion: Graph literacy is an important design consideration for PRO visualizations. Biomedical informatics researchers should be intentional in understanding user needs by involving diverse and representative individuals during development.

Keywords: consumer health information; health education; health literacy; patient-reported outcome measure; user-centered design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Meter (A), Words (B), Comic (C), and Emoji (D) prototypes. Emoji is our own adaptation of a previously published visualization. Only one view of the interactive visualizations is shown. Additional views depicting entire timelines are shown in the participant packet (Multimedia Supplementary Material S1).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
SUS scores by usability participant.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. National Cancer Institute: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Prostate Cancer—Cancer Stat Facts. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html Accessed April 30, 2022.
    1. Schmidt S, Garin O, Pardo Y, et al.; EMPRO Group. Assessing quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic and standardized comparison of available instruments. Qual Life Res 2014; 23 (8): 2169–81. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ávila M, Patel L, López S, et al.Patient-reported outcomes after treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev 2018; 66: 23–44. - PubMed
    1. Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, et al.; ProtecT Study Group. Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375 (15): 1425–37. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Snyder CF, Smith KC, Bantug ET, Tolbert EE, Blackford AL, Brundage MD; PRO Data Presentation Stakeholder Advisory Board. What do these scores mean? Presenting patient-reported outcomes data to patients and clinicians to improve interpretability. Cancer 2017; 123 (10): 1848–59. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types