Communicating science-based recommendations with memorable and actionable guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ratner RK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4183169 | biostudies-other | 2014 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Over the past 20 years, a series of reports written by groups of senior researchers and administrators have recommended changes to improve the training environments for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers in the United States. However, academic institutions and departments have largely failed to implement these recommendations, which has exacerbated the problems faced by these trainees. Here, based on input from trainees at different career stages, we outline seven practical changes that academic institutions and departments can make to improve their training environments.
| S-EPMC7413740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: With the growing use of electronic health record systems, there is a demand for an electronic version of the leading American pediatric preventive care guideline, Bright Futures. As computer implementation requires actionable recommendations, it is important to assess to what degree Bright Futures meets criteria for actionability. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to 1) determine the number of actionable recommendations in the current edition of Bright Futures and 2) to recommend a specific format for representing an important class of guidelines in a way that better facilitates computer implementation. METHODS: We consolidated all action statements in Bright Futures into recommendations. We then used two dimensions (decidability and executability) in the Guideline Implementability Appraisal v 2.0 (GLIA) to determine the actionability of the recommendations. Decidability means the recommendation states precisely under what conditions to perform those actions. Executability means actions are stated specifically, unambiguously and in sufficient detail. The results were presented in a figure titled Service Interval Diagram (SID), describing actionable recommendations, age intervals during which they are applicable, and how frequently they should occur in that interval. RESULTS: We consolidated 2161 action items into 245 recommendations and identified 52 that were actionable (21%). Almost exclusively, these recommendations addressed screening, such as newborn metabolic screening, or child safety, such as car seat use. A limited number (n=13) of recommendations for other areas of anticipatory guidance were also actionable. No recommendations on child discipline, family function or mental health met our criteria for actionability. The SID representing these recommendations is presented in a figure. CONCLUSION: Only a portion of the Bright Futures Guidelines meets criteria for actionability. Substantial work lies ahead to develop most recommendations for anticipatory guidance into a computer implementable format.
| S-EPMC4187083 | biostudies-other
Project description:This essay examines the societal dynamics surrounding modern science. It first discusses a number of challenges facing any effort to communicate science in social environments: lay publics with varying levels of preparedness for fully understanding new scientific breakthroughs; the deterioration of traditional media infrastructures; and an increasingly complex set of emerging technologies that are surrounded by a host of ethical, legal, and social considerations. Based on this overview, I discuss four areas in which empirical social science helps clarify intuitive but sometimes faulty assumptions about the social-level mechanisms of science communication and outline an agenda for bench and social scientists--driven by current social-scientific research in the field of science communication--to guide more effective communication efforts at the societal level in the future.
| S-EPMC3752169 | biostudies-other
Project description:Given the public interest in epigenetic science, this study aimed to better understand media representations of epigenetics in national newspaper coverage in various regions in North America, Europe, and Asia. Content analysis was used to study media messages about epigenetics, their policy focus, and the balance of the reporting. We identified several recurring themes in the news reports, including policy messages relating to individual and societal responsibilities. We also found shortcomings in the media's portrayal of epigenetic science, and sought to identify potential causes by considering the underlying scientific evidence that the media reported on. A case study analysis showed that the results of epigenetic studies were often overstated in academic research publications due to common experimental limitations. We suggest that defining standardized criteria with which to evaluate epigenetic studies could help to overcome some of the challenges inherent in translating complex epigenetic research findings for non-technical audiences, and present a Press Kit template that researchers can adapt and use to aid in the development of accurate and balanced press releases.
| S-EPMC7673471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Uncertainty is an inherent part of knowledge, and yet in an era of contested expertise, many shy away from openly communicating their uncertainty about what they know, fearful of their audience's reaction. But what effect does communication of such epistemic uncertainty have? Empirical research is widely scattered across many disciplines. This interdisciplinary review structures and summarizes current practice and research across domains, combining a statistical and psychological perspective. This informs a framework for uncertainty communication in which we identify three objects of uncertainty-facts, numbers and science-and two levels of uncertainty: direct and indirect. An examination of current practices provides a scale of nine expressions of direct uncertainty. We discuss attempts to codify indirect uncertainty in terms of quality of the underlying evidence. We review the limited literature about the effects of communicating epistemic uncertainty on cognition, affect, trust and decision-making. While there is some evidence that communicating epistemic uncertainty does not necessarily affect audiences negatively, impact can vary between individuals and communication formats. Case studies in economic statistics and climate change illustrate our framework in action. We conclude with advice to guide both communicators and future researchers in this important but so far rather neglected field.
| S-EPMC6549952 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this paper I describe how a narrative approach to science communication may help audiences to more fully understand how science is relevant to their own lives and behaviors. The use of prescriptive scientific narrative can help to overcome challenges specific to scientific concepts, especially the need to reconsider long-held beliefs in the face of new empirical findings. Narrative can captivate the audience, driving anticipation for plot resolution, thus becoming a self-motivating vehicle for information delivery. This quality gives narrative considerable power to explain complex phenomena and causal processes, and to create and reinforce memory traces for better recall and application over time. Because of the inherent properties of narrative communication, their creators have a special responsibility to ensure even-handedness in selection and presentation of the scientific evidence. The recent transformation in communication and information technology has brought about new platforms for delivering content, particularly through interactivity, which can use structured self-tailoring to help individuals most efficiently get exactly the content that they need. As with all educational efforts, prescriptive scientific narratives must be evaluated systematically to determine whether they have the desired effects in improving understanding and changing behavior.
| S-EPMC4183172 | biostudies-other
Project description:The use of graphical illustration in lecture presentations can make a seemingly boring lesson more attractive and enticing to students. Creating science-themed illustrations and science-based narratives can also lead to creative and critical thinking among students. We used writing editorials and creating editorial cartoons as a learning activity to promote critical thinking and creative skills that are essential in communicating scientific information. This activity can be used with a range of audiences, at various educational levels and in basic to advanced courses.
| S-EPMC5969399 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Brain health is one of the cornerstones of a long and full life. Active care for brain health and reduction of lifestyle-related risks for brain disorders may be a key strategy in tackling the growing prevalence of mental and neurological illnesses. Public knowledge, perception, and preventive behavior need to be considered in the planning of effective strategies for brain health promotion. Our research is the first effort aimed at assessing Slovenian lay public knowledge, search and use of scientific information about the brain, and care for brain health. Methods: An online survey was used to gather data for descriptive and associative statistical analyses of a sample of the Slovenian public (n = 2568) in August 2017. Participants with formal brain-related education were excluded, leaving the remaining sample of the lay public (n = 1012). Demographic characteristics and information regarding the perceived importance and knowledge of brain health and engagement in preventive behaviors of participants were collected, and key associative analyses were carried out. Results: The majority of respondents (89%) considered brain health to be important. Over one-third (39%) considered their knowledge of the brain as sufficient relative to their needs. Most of the respondents identified science-recommended practices to be important for brain health. No recommendation was followed daily by the majority of the respondents, primarily due to declared lack of time (59%), and lack of information (32%). Information was obtained primarily from television (38%), followed by newspapers and magazines (31%), the Internet (31%), and direct conversations (27%). However, the highest-rated, preferred source of information was lectured by experts. One-third of our sample struggled with the trustworthiness of information sources. Female gender and older age were associated with a higher frequency of healthy practices. Personal or familial diagnoses of brain disorders were not associated with a higher frequency of the behavior in favor of brain health, but did affect available time and perceived value of preventive practices. Conclusions: Our research provides an initial insight into the perceptions, knowledge, and brain health-promoting behavior of the Slovenian lay public. Our findings can inform future strategies for science communication, public education and engagement, and policy-making to improve lifelong active care for brain health.
| S-EPMC8281117 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As increasing amounts of data accumulate on the effects of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the risk factors that lead to poor outcomes, it is possible to produce personalized estimates of the risks faced by groups of people with different characteristics. The challenge of how to communicate these then becomes apparent. Based on empirical work (total n = 5520, UK) supported by in-person interviews with the public and physicians, we make recommendations on the presentation of such information. These include: using predominantly percentages when communicating the absolute risk, but also providing, for balance, a format which conveys a contrasting (higher) perception of risk (expected frequency out of 10 000); using a visual linear scale cut at an appropriate point to illustrate the maximum risk, explained through an illustrative 'persona' who might face that highest level of risk; and providing context to the absolute risk through presenting a range of other 'personas' illustrating people who would face risks of a wide range of different levels. These 'personas' should have their major risk factors (age, existing health conditions) described. By contrast, giving people absolute likelihoods of other risks they face in an attempt to add context was considered less helpful. We note that observed effect sizes generally were small. However, even small effects are meaningful and relevant when scaled up to population levels.
| S-EPMC8059635 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate whether alignment of strength of recommendations with quality of evidence differs in consensus based versus evidence based guidelines.DesignEmpirical analysis.Data sourceGuidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) up to 27 March 2021.Study selectionRecommendations were clearly categorised as consensus or evidence based, were separated from the remainder of the text, and included both the quality of evidence and the strength of the recommendations.Data extractionPaired authors independently extracted the recommendation characteristics, including type of recommendation (consensus or evidence based), grading system used for developing recommendations, strength of the recommendation, and quality of evidence. The study team also calculated the number of discordant recommendations (strong recommendations with low quality evidence) and inappropriate discordant recommendations (those that did not meet grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation criteria of appropriateness).ResultsThe study included 12 ACC/AHA guidelines that generated 1434 recommendations and 69 ASCO guidelines that generated 1094 recommendations. Of the 504 ACC/AHA recommendations based on low quality evidence, 200 (40%) proved to be consensus based versus 304 (60%) evidence based; of the 404 ASCO recommendations based on low quality evidence, 292 (72%) were consensus based versus 112 (28%) that were evidence based. In both ACC/AHA and ASCO guidelines, the consensus approach yielded more discordant recommendations (ACC/AHA: odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 3.1; ASCO: 2.9, 1.1 to 7.8) and inappropriate discordant recommendations (ACC/AHA: 2.6, 1.7 to 3.7; ASCO: 5.1, 1.6 to 16.0) than the evidence based approach.ConclusionConsensus based guidelines produce more recommendations violating the evidence based medicine principles than evidence based guidelines. Ensuring appropriate alignment of quality of evidence with the strength of recommendations is key to the development of "trustworthy" guidelines.
| S-EPMC8613613 | biostudies-literature