Renata Linertov\u00e1, Ar\u00e1nzazu Hern\u00e1ndez-Yumar, Carmen Guirado-Fuentes, Benjam\u00edn Rodr\u00edguez-D\u00edaz, Cristina Valc\u00e1rcel-Nazco, I\u00f1aki Imaz-Iglesia, Montserrat Carmona-Rodr\u00edguez, Lidia Garc\u00eda-P\u00e9rez<\/p>\n
ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/p>\n Background<\/strong><\/p>\n Cost-effectiveness analyses of health technologies have become a part of the decision-making process in healthcare policies. Nevertheless, economic results are not always presented in comprehensible formats for non-technical audiences, such as the general population, healthcare professionals or decision-makers. The purpose of this study was to observe which formats best convey the key message of an economic evaluation, and which are best received by two different audiences.<\/p>\n Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n The summary of a hypothetical cost-effectiveness analysis was edited in different formats: infographic, plain language text and video-abstract for the general population; executive summary and policy brief for a specialized population, i.e. clinicians, clinical and non-clinical managers, or methodologists in health-technology assessment. Participants were randomly shown one of the formats, and data on objective and subjective comprehension, and perceived usefulness\/acceptability were gathered by means of online questionnaires. Statistical differences between formats within each audience were analysed.<\/p>\n