Table 6

Respondents’ understanding of technical terms: N = 141.

A)*
RESPONDENTS’ UNDERSTANDING, N (%)
TECHNICAL TERMSIT WOULD NOT BE HELPFUL TO ME TO UNDERSTANDDO NOT UNDERSTAND BUT WOULD LIKE TOSOME UNDERSTANDINGYES, I UNDERSTAND AND COULD EXPLAIN TO OTHERS
Relative risk29 (20.5)27 (19.1)49 (34.7)36 (25.5)
Absolute risk26 (18.4)23 (16.3)51 (36.1)41 (29.0)
Systematic review28 (19.8)24 (17.0)48 (34.0)41 (29.0)
Odds ratio32 (22.6)41 (29.0)46 (32.6)22 (15.6)
Meta-analysis34 (24.1)55 (39.0)27 (19.1)25 (17.7)
B)*
RESPONDENTS’ UNDERSTANDING, N (%)
TECHNICAL TERMSIT WOULD NOT BE HELPFUL TO ME TO UNDERSTANDDO NOT UNDERSTAND BUT WOULD LIKE TOSOME UNDERSTANDINGYES, I UNDERSTAND AND COULD EXPLAIN TO OTHERS
Clinical effectiveness32 (22.6)24 (17.0)56 (39.7)29 (20.5)
Number needed to treat36 (25.5)47 (33.3)27 (19.1)31 (21.9)
Confidence interval35 (24.8)36 (25.5)50 (35.4)20 (14.1)
Heterogeneity36 (25.5)60 (42.5)34 (24.1)11 (7.8)
Publication bias33 (23.4)58 (41.1)35 (24.8)15 (10.6)
  • * Table 6 is divided into parts A and B for technical reasons.