Question · asked by 1 review
Personalised risk communication vs general risk information: Knowledge regarding screening test/condition concerned ‐ calculated risk score (numerical) versus general information various continuous scales
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Personalised risk communication vs general risk information Knowledge regarding screening test/condition concerned ‐ calculated risk score (numerical) versus general information various continuous scales · patients with informed decision making about taking screening tests Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 588 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.