A key challenge for designers of healthcare public reports is the development of a presentation format that accurately communicates the variability in the quality of care among healthcare systems. This study conducted in the United States explored whether presenting public report information within narratives and with tests of healthcare quality metrics supported the public report sensemaking process. The study involved 200 participants and employed a 2 (public report information presented in the standard format, presented within a narrative) * 2 (no tests of quality metrics added to standard report, metrics tests added) between-subjects experimental design. The participants viewed the scenario of a patient looking for dialysis facility-related information. They were then asked which dialysis facility they would choose for their care and their level of confidence in their choice. Subsequently, a knowledge quiz evaluating how the participants interpreted the information presented to them, the NASA-TLX workload survey, and a usability questionnaire were administered. The results showed that the probability of choosing the better facility from the perspective of the quality measures included in the report changed from 0.69 to 0.89 when information was presented within a narrative rather than with the standard public report format. The results also found a significantly higher comprehension score (M = 54.58, SD = 18.51) when information was presented within the narrative than when presented in the standard public report format (M = 44.57, SD = 25.13). When information was presented to the participants within a narrative, the narrative may have enabled the participants to visualize themselves as the person depicted in the narrative and this may have increased the perceived relevance of the quality measures. Total workload, mental demand and perceived usability were higher when information was presented within the narrative than when presented in the standard format. The high workload and mental demand may be due to the stress placed on the information processing channels while reading a narrative and the effort expended to relate it to the quality measures. They may also be markers of more deliberative decision making facilitated by the narratives. No significant effect of tests of quality metrics was found on the dependent variables of choice of the better healthcare facility, comprehension, and usability. There was also no significant effect of quality metrics tests on overall workload. However, the effect of quality metrics tests on the mental demand subscale of NASA-TLX was significant. Mental demand was higher without quality metrics tests than with quality metrics tests. No significant interaction was found between the two independent variables on the dependent variables of choice of the better healthcare facility, comprehension, workload, and usability. It is recommended that narratives be used to present public report information to support informed healthcare decisions.

医疗保健公共报告设计者面临的一个关键挑战是开发一种演示格式，以准确传达医疗保健系统之间护理质量的可变性。这项在美国进行的研究探讨了在叙述中呈现公共报告信息和医疗质量指标测试是否支持公共报告意义制定过程。该研究涉及 200 名参与者，并采用了 2 （以标准格式呈现的公共报告信息，在叙述中呈现） * 2（没有在标准报告中添加质量指标测试，添加了指标测试) 受试者之间的实验设计。参与者查看了患者寻找透析设施相关信息的场景。然后询问他们会选择哪种透析设施来进行护理以及他们对选择的信心程度。随后，进行了评估参与者如何解释呈现给他们的信息的知识测验、NASA-TLX 工作量调查和可用性问卷调查。结果表明，当信息以叙述形式而不是标准的公开报告格式呈现时，从报告中包含的质量度量的角度选择更好设施的概率从 0.69 变为 0.89。结果还发现理解得分明显更高（M  = 54.58，SD = 18.51) 当信息在叙述中呈现时比在标准公开报告格式中呈现时 ( M  = 44.57, SD = 25.13）。当信息在叙述中呈现给参与者时，叙述可能使参与者将自己想象成叙述中描绘的人，这可能增加了质量度量的感知相关性。当信息在叙述中呈现时，总工作量、心理需求和感知可用性比以标准格式呈现时更高。高工作量和精神需求可能是由于在阅读叙述时对信息处理渠道施加的压力以及将其与质量措施联系起来所花费的努力。它们也可能是叙述所促进的更慎重决策的标志。没有发现质量指标测试对选择更好的医疗机构的因变量有显着影响，理解力和可用性。质量指标测试对整体工作负载也没有显着影响。然而，质量指标测试对 NASA-TLX 的心理需求分量表的影响是显着的。没有质量指标测试的心理需求高于有质量指标测试的心理需求。在选择更好的医疗机构、理解力、工作量和可用性的因变量的两个自变量之间没有发现显着的相互作用。建议使用叙述来呈现公共报告信息，以支持知情的医疗保健决策。没有质量指标测试的心理需求高于有质量指标测试的心理需求。在选择更好的医疗机构、理解力、工作量和可用性的因变量的两个自变量之间没有发现显着的相互作用。建议使用叙述来呈现公共报告信息，以支持知情的医疗保健决策。没有质量指标测试的心理需求高于有质量指标测试的心理需求。在选择更好的医疗机构、理解力、工作量和可用性的因变量的两个自变量之间没有发现显着的相互作用。建议使用叙述来呈现公共报告信息，以支持知情的医疗保健决策。