Untangling interactivity's effects: The role of cognitive absorption, perceived visual informativeness, and cancer information overload.
Aurora Occa, Susan E Morgan, Wei Peng and 4 others
PMID 33969824WHAT IT FOUND
The tailored aid did not reduce cancer information overload or directly improve trial attitudes, knowledge, or intentions, though it made trial information feel more visually helpful and engaging.
Key findings
01The aid that tailored messages to participants’ answers produced higher perceived visual informativeness and greater cognitive absorption than the modality-only aid.
02The tailored aid did not significantly reduce cancer information overload compared with the modality-only aid.
03Perceived visual informativeness did not directly improve attitudes, knowledge, or intentions about clinical trials.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study measured perceptions, knowledge, and intentions, not actual consent decisions or clinical trial enrollment. The two aids were not identical in visual features: the tailored aid included avatars, so visual differences may have influenced responses. Most participants were Caucasian, highly educated, and fluent in English, limiting generalizability. No a-priori sample size calculation was performed. The study was part of a larger experiment, and detailed logic of the tailored aid was reported elsewhere.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The supplied metadata lists NIH extramural research support, but the article text does not name a funder.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the tailored aid improves clinical trial consent or enrollment. The study measured perceptions, knowledge, and intentions only, and the tailored aid did not directly improve attitudes, knowledge, or intentions.