Table 2 Use of and opinions about infographics, preferences for information in infographics, and barriers to reading full text articles in the total sample (N = 254 participants) and compared between those not involved in research or academia (N = 138) and those involved in researcher and/or academia (N = 116)
Total sample | Not involved in research/ academia | Involved in research/ academia | Chi2, p-value** | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Use of infographics (primary outcomes) | ||||
Likely to read full text after viewing an infographic, n (%) | ||||
Extremely unlikely | 6 (2%) | 3 (2%) | 3 (3%) | 4.5, p = 0.474 |
Somewhat unlikely | 25 (10%) | 17 (12%) | 8 (7%) | |
Neither likely nor unlikely | 30 (12%) | 14 (10%) | 16 (14%) | |
Somewhat likely | 139 (55%) | 72 (52%) | 67 (58%) | |
Extremely likely | 54 (21%) | 32 (23%) | 22 (19%) | |
Use infographics as a substitute for reading full text, n (%) | ||||
Never | 30 (12%) | 9 (7%) | 21 (18%) | 20.8, p < 0.001* |
Sometimes | 119 (47%) | 57 (41%) | 62 (54%) | |
About half the time | 49 (19%) | 31 (23%) | 18 (16%) | |
Most of the time | 53 (21%) | 40 (29%) | 13 (11%) | |
Always | 3 (1%) | 1 (1%) | 2 (2%) | |
Accessing infographics, n (%)* | ||||
170 (67%) | 80 (58%) | 90 (78%) | 11.0, p = 0.001* | |
111 (44%) | 78 (57%) | 33 (29%) | 20.2, p < 0.001* | |
Journal website | 87 (34%) | 44 (32%) | 43 (37%) | 0.8, p = 0.386 |
77 (30%) | 47 (34%) | 30 (26%) | 2.0, p = 0.157 | |
Non-journal website | 42 (17%) | 21 (15%) | 21 (18%) | 0.4, p = 0.537 |
Other | 28 (11%) | 9 (7%) | 19 (16%) | 6.2, p = 0.012* |
Device used to view infographics, n (%)* | ||||
Smart phone | 225 (89%) | 124 (90%) | 101 (87%) | 0.5, p = 0.487 |
Laptop | 137 (54%) | 65 (47%) | 72 (62%) | 5.7, p = 0.017* |
Desktop | 63 (25%) | 31 (23%) | 32 (28%) | 0.9, p = 0.346 |
iPad | 38 (15%) | 18 (13%) | 20 (17%) | 0.9, p = 0.350 |
Other | 3 (1%) | 1 (1%) | 2 (2%) | 0.5, p = 0.463 |
Opinions about infographics | ||||
Infographics should be detailed enough so readers don’t have to read the full-text, n (%) | ||||
Definitely not | 20 (8%) | 7 (5%) | 13 (11%) | 14.0, p = 0.007* |
Probably not | 39 (15%) | 17 (12%) | 22 (19%) | |
Might or might not | 55 (22%) | 24 (17%) | 31 (27%) | |
Probably yes | 87 (34%) | 53 (38%) | 34 (29%) | |
Definitely yes | 53 (21%) | 37 (27%) | 16 (14%) | |
Infographics are useful tools to communicate research, n (%) | ||||
Definitely not | 1 (< 1%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (1%) | 11.4, p = 0.022* |
Probably not | 3 (1%) | 1 (1%) | 2 (2%) | |
Might or might not | 16 (6%) | 4 (3%) | 12 (10%) | |
Probably yes | 49 (19%) | 22 (16%) | 27 (23%) | |
Definitely yes | 185 (73%) | 111 (80%) | 74 (64%) | |
Infographics increase the attention research receives, n (%) | ||||
Definitely not | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1.1, p = 0.776 |
Probably not | 4 (2%) | 2 (2%) | 2 (2%) | |
Might or might not | 8 (3%) | 3 (2%) | 5 (4%) | |
Probably yes | 53 (21%) | 28 (20%) | 25 (22%) | |
Definitely yes | 189 (74%) | 105 (76%) | 84 (72%) | |
Functions of an infographic, n (%)* | ||||
Communicate research in a more user-friendly way | 226 (89%) | 127 (92%) | 99 (85%) | 2.9, p = 0.090 |
Reduce the time burden of reading the full text | 162 (64%) | 105 (76%) | 57 (49%) | 19.8, p < 0.001* |
Help readers quickly decide whether to read the full text | 161 (63%) | 89 (65%) | 72 (62%) | 0.2, p = 0.690 |
Entice readers to read the full text | 146 (58%) | 72 (52%) | 74 (64%) | 3.5, p = 0.062 |
Other | 18 (7%) | 9 (7%) | 9 (8%) | 0.1, p = 0.702 |
Preferences for information to include in infographics | ||||
Information expected to see in an infographic, n (%)* | ||||
Conclusion or ‘Take away’ message | 240 (95%) | 131 (95%) | 109 (94%) | 0.1, p = 0.738 |
Description of intervention(s) | 234 (92%) | 130 (94%) | 104 (90%) | 1.8, p = 0.180 |
Description of outcome(s) | 220 (87%) | 122 (88%) | 98 (85%) | 0.8, p = 0.360 |
Description of population | 206 (81%) | 105 (76%) | 101 (87%) | 5.0, p = 0.026* |
Description of comparison(s) | 188 (74%) | 96 (70%) | 92 (79%) | 3.1, p = 0.078 |
Sample size | 166 (65%) | 84 (61%) | 82 (71%) | 2.7, p = 0.101 |
Statistics summarising the effect size | 147 (58%) | 79 (57%) | 68 (59%) | 0.0, p = 0.825 |
Some study limitations | 100 (39%) | 56 (41%) | 44 (38%) | 0.2, p = 0.667 |
Conflicts of interest | 65 (26%) | 31 (23%) | 34 (29%) | 1.6, p = 0.213 |
Other | 14 (6%) | 9 (7%) | 5 (4%) | 0.6, p = 0.442 |
Barriers to reading full-text articles, n (%)* | ||||
Lack of time | 196 (77%) | 102 (74%) | 94 (81%) | 1.8, p = 0.178 |
Lack of access | 180 (71%) | 115 (83%) | 65 (56%) | 22.7, p < 0.001* |
Unsure how to determine study quality | 67 (26%) | 48 (35%) | 19 (16%) | 11.0, p = 0.001* |
Unsure how to interpret results | 60 (24%) | 37 (27%) | 23 (20%) | 1.7, p = 0.192 |
Unsure how to interpret methods | 59 (23%) | 35 (25%) | 24 (21%) | 0.8, p = 0.380 |
Other | 14 (6%) | 9 (7%) | 5 (4%) | 0.6, p = 0.442 |
No barriers experienced | 6 (2%) | 3 (2%) | 3 (3%) | 0.0, p = 0.829 |
Never attempted to access full text | 3 (1%) | 2 (2%) | 1 (1%) | 0.2, p = 0.666 |