Document Type


Publication Date



Two hundred and twenty-four adults evaluated three preference-sensitive online decision aids related to their personal self-reported health status. Respondents were recruited in 2009, and user review was conducted online outside of a research or clinical setting. The majority of respondents had some college education, were white, and were middle aged. The three decision aids tested (statins [n = 70], aspirin [n = 97], and MRI [n = 57]) have been developed through a rigorous, iterative, expert medical review process; are evidence based; and are written in plain language. The results of general linear model repeated measures analyses were statistically significant for pre-post changes in user knowledge and for between-subject differences according to health issue. Post hoc comparisons for the results of one-way analysis of variance for eight dimensions of usability show that users of the MRI decision aid, compared with the other two user groups, felt that they had learned more, that the tool had helped clear up their feelings about the issue, and that they were more inclined to talk with their physician about their health issue.


This document was originally published by Society for Participatory Medicine in Journal of Participatory Medicine. This work is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Details regarding the use of this work can be found at: