TABLE IV.
Ratings of the patient education material prototypes presented during phase 2, activity 2, and the post-meeting review
| Prototype | Rating | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Mean | IQRa | |
| Activity 2 (n=11) | ||
| Prototype 2A | 5.55 | 6.00–6.00 |
| Prototype 2B | 4.91 | 4.50–5.50 |
| Prototype 2C | 5.45 | 5.00–6.00 |
| Prototype 2D | 5.09 | 4.50–6.00 |
|
| ||
| Post-meeting review (n=7) (Conceptboardb) | ||
| Follow-up prototype A | 5.50 | 5.00–6.50 |
| Follow-up prototype B | 5.79 | 5.50–6.75 |
a
Interquartile range expressed as first–third quartile. Activity 2 values include ratings given by the Task Force Prostate Cancer Screening Working Group chair and PEM developer.
b
Digital Republic Media Group, Halle, Germany.