Search

When patients consult more than one source of information about their medications, they may encounter conflicting information. Although conflicting information has been associated with negative outcomes, including worse medication adherence, little is known about how patients make health decisions when they receive conflicting information. The objective of this study was to explore the decision making strategies that individuals with arthritis use when they receive conflicting medication information. Qualitative telephone interviews were conducted with 20 men and women with arthritis. Interview vignettes posed scenarios involving conflicting information from different sources (e.g., doctor, pharmacist, and relative), and respondents were asked how they would respond to the situation. Data analysis involved inductive coding to identify emergent themes and deductive contextualization to make meaning from the emergent themes. In response to conflicting medication information, patients used rules of thumb, trial and error, weighed benefits and risks, and sought more information, especially from a doctor. Patients relied heavily on trial and error when there was no conflicting information involved in the vignette. In contrast, patients used rules of thumb as a unique response to conflicting information. These findings increase our understanding of what patients do when they receive conflicting medication information. Given that patient exposure to conflicting information is likely to increase alongside the proliferation of medication information on the Internet, patients may benefit from assistance in identifying the most appropriate decision strategies for dealing with conflicting information, including information about best information sources.

Concurrent sexual partnerships (partnerships that overlap in time) may contribute to higher rates of HIV transmission in African Americans. Attitudes toward a behavior constitute an important component of most models of health-related behavior and behavioral change. We have developed a scale, employing realistic vignettes that appear to reliably measure attitudes about concurrency in young African American adults.Vignette-based items to assess attitudes about concurrency were developed following focus groups and cognitive testing of items adapted from existing scales assessing psychosocial constructs surrounding related sexual behaviors. The new items were included in a telephone survey of African American adults (18-34 years old) in Eastern North Carolina immediately before and after a radio campaign designed to discourage concurrency. We performed an exploratory factor analysis on each sample (pre- and post-campaign) to cross-validate results. We retained factors with a primary loading of ≥0.50 and no secondary loading >0.30. Cronbach's coefficient alpha was used to evaluate internal reliability. Associations in the predicted direction between the mean responses to items on the final factor and known correlates of concurrency validated the scale.Factor analysis in a random pre-campaign subsample yielded a one-factor 6-item scale with acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.79). As expected, the attitude factor was positively associated with participation in concurrent partnerships, whether assessed by self-report (r = 0.298, p