基于互联网的癌症风险评估工具对风险沟通最佳实践的依从性:卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析内容分析%A Waters,Erika A %A Foust,Jeremy L %A Scherer,Laura D %A McQueen,Amy %A Taber,Jennifer M %+华盛顿大学医学院，Euclid Ave 600 S, Campus Box 8100，密苏里州圣路易斯市，63110，美国，1 3147475705 waterse@wustl.edu %K健康传播%K个性化医疗%K互联网%K风险评估%D 2021 %7 25.1.2021 %9原文%J J Med internet Res %G English %X基于互联网的风险评估工具为人们了解自己的癌症风险并采取降低风险的行为提供了一个潜在的途径。然而，关于基于互联网的风险评估工具是否坚持科学证据构成良好的风险沟通策略，人们知之甚少。此外，从用户体验的角度来看，它们的质量可能会有所不同。目的:本研究旨在了解当前风险沟通的最佳实践在多大程度上已应用于基于互联网的癌症风险评估工具。方法:我们于2019年8月6日进行了一项搜索，以确定提供癌症风险或患癌症可能性个性化评估的网站。每个网站(N=39)根据标准化标准进行编码，并重点关注3类:网站一般特征、可访问性和可信度、风险沟通格式和策略。结果:一些风险沟通的最佳实践在网站中得到了更多的遵循。首先，我们发现不明确的医学术语普遍存在，阻碍了那些健康素养有限的人的理解。 For example, 90% (35/39) of websites included technical language that the general public may find difficult to understand, yet only 23% (9/39) indicated that medical professionals were their intended audience. Second, websites lacked sufficient information for users to determine the credibility of the risk assessment, making it difficult to judge the scientific validity of their risk. For instance, only 59% (23/39) of websites referenced the scientific model used to calculate the user’s cancer risk. Third, practices known to foster unbiased risk comprehension, such as adding qualitative labels to quantitative numbers, were used by only 15% (6/39) of websites. Conclusions: Limitations in risk communication strategies used by internet-based cancer risk assessment tools were common. By observing best practices, these tools could limit confusion and cultivate understanding to help people make informed decisions and motivate people to engage in risk-reducing behaviors. %M 33492238 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2021/1/e23318/ %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33492238