Communicating global cardiovascular risk: Are icon arrays better than numerical estimates in improving understanding, recall and perception of risk?

ObjectiveExperts recommend that adults have their global cardiovascular risk assessed. We investigated whether icon arrays increase understanding, recall, perception of CVR, and behavioral intent as compared with numerical information.MethodsMale outpatient veterans, at an intermediate to high cardiovascular risk participated in a randomized controlled trial of a computer tutorial presenting individualized risk. Message format was presented in 3 formats: percentages, frequencies, and frequencies with icon arrays. We assessed understanding immediately (T1) and recall at 20 min (T2) and 2 weeks (T3) after the intervention. We assessed perceptions of importance/seriousness, intent to adhere, and self-efficacy at T1. Self-reported adherence was assessed at T3.ResultsOne-hundred and twenty male veterans participated. Age, education, race, health literacy and numeracy were comparable at baseline. There were no differences in understanding at T1 [p = .31] and recall at T3 [p = .10]. Accuracy was inferior with frequencies with icon arrays than percentages or frequencies at T2 [p ≤ .001]. There were no differences in perception of seriousness and importance for heart disease, behavioral intent, self-efficacy, actual adherence and satisfaction.ConclusionIcon arrays may impair short-term recall of CVR.Practice implicationsIcon arrays will not necessarily result in better understanding and recall of medical risk in all patients.