This section presents the key results of the longitudinal analyses of the consumer survey data from waves 1 and 2. The results are organized according to three main outcomes: (1) awareness, (2) attitudes/perceived benefits, and (3) behavior/use. For each outcome variable analyzed, we tested whether there was a statistically significant increase between survey waves (wave 2 minus wave 1) at the p<0.05 level using a one-sided test and a 95 percent confidence interval.
The subsections below provide focused, streamlined summaries and exhibits of the results. Each subsection begins with a summary table presenting the results of the tested variables. Following the summary table is a discussion of each variable. More detailed information on the analysis results for each outcome variable can be found in Appendix P.
5.1 Consumer Level of Awareness
5.1.1 Summary Table of Consumer Awareness Longitudinal Findings
Exhibit 28 presents summary information for each of the variables tested and presented in this subsection.
Exhibit 28. Summary Table of Consumer Awareness Longitudinal Findings
| Question |
Difference (Wave 2 - Wave 1) |
Confidence Interval |
P-Value |
Forest Plot |
| Heard of the concept of comparing health care treatments? |
0.046 |
(-0.019, 1) |
0.12 |
4.6% |
| Heard about the existence of research that helps you compare treatment options? |
0.023 |
(-0.036, 1) |
0.25 |
2.3% |
| Aware of research on the evaluation of treatment options? |
0.126 |
(-0.020, 1) |
0.08 |
12.6% |
| Ever heard of AHRQ? |
0.065 |
(0.026, 1) |
0.0003* |
6.5% |
| Ever heard of the EHC Program? |
0.033 |
(-0.002, 1) |
0.06 |
3.3% |
*Statistically significant at p<0.05 level.
5.1.2 Consumer Awareness Longitudinal Findings by Variable
Consumers' unaided awareness of CER increased over the course of the two survey administrations, although the increase was not statistically significant (p=0.12). As shown in Exhibit 29, almost 61 percent of consumers reported unaided awareness of the concept of comparing treatment options at the time of the first survey administration (n=1,005); unaided awareness increased to 65 percent at the time of the second survey (n=948).
Exhibit 29. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Unaided Awareness of CER from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Consumers' aided awareness of CER also increased from wave 1 to wave 2, although the increase did not reach statistical significance (p=0.25). As presented in Exhibit 30, 18 percent of consumers reported aided awareness at the time of the first survey administration (n=1,005); almost 21 percent of consumers reported aided awareness at the time of the second survey (n=948).
Exhibit 30. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Aided Awareness of CER from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Consumers also reported an increase in their awareness of research on the evaluation of treatment options for specific medical conditions (Exhibit 31). Like unaided and aided awareness, however, the change was not statistically significant (p=0.08). During the first survey, 73 percent indicated awareness of such research (n=172); 86 percent indicated awareness during the second survey (n=174). (Exhibit 31.)
Exhibit 31. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Awareness of Research on the Evaluation of Treatment Options for Specific Medical Conditions from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Consumers reported a statistically significant increase in awareness of AHRQ from wave 1 to wave 2. As shown in Exhibit 32, four percent of consumers reported awareness of AHRQ at the time of the first survey administration (n=1,005); 11 percent reported awareness during the second survey (n=948). This increase was significant at a 95 percent confidence level (p=0.0003).
Exhibit 32. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Awareness of AHRQ from Wave 1 to Wave 2

As presented in Exhibit 33, four percent of consumers reported awareness of the EHC Program during the first survey (n=1,005), while seven percent reported awareness during the second survey (n=948). This increase was not statistically significant (p=0.06).
Exhibit 33. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Awareness of the EHC Program from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Return to Contents
5.2 Consumer Attitudes and Perceived Benefits
Exhibit 34 presents summary information for each of the variables tested and presented in this subsection.
5.2.1 Summary Table of Consumer Attitudes and Perceived Benefits Longitudinal Findings
Exhibit 34. Summary Table of Consumer Attitudes and Perceived Benefits Longitudinal Findings
| Question |
Difference (Wave 2 - Wave 1) |
Confidence Interval |
P-Value |
Forest Plot |
| Interested in learning more about evaluating treatment options for specific medical conditions? |
0.132 |
(0.064, 1) |
0.0008* |
13.2% |
| Interested in evaluating treatment options before making medical decisions? |
0.054 |
(-0.008, 1) |
0.077 |
5.4% |
| Interested in learning more about the EHC Program? |
0.140 |
(0.070, 1) |
0.0004* |
14.0% |
*Statistically significant at p<0.05 level.
5.2.2 Consumer Attitudes and Perceived Benefits Longitudinal Findings by Variable
Interest in learning about CER increased over time. As shown in Exhibit 35, during the first survey, 37 percent of consumers indicated interest in learning more about evaluating treatment options for specific medical conditions (n=1,005). Fifty-one percent of consumers indicated interest during the second survey (n=948). This increase was significant at a 95 percent confidence level (p=0.0008).
Exhibit 35. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Interest in Learning More about Evaluating Treatment Options for Specific Medical Conditions from Wave 1 to Wave 2

In addition to learning about evaluating treatment options for specific medical conditions, consumers also demonstrated an increased interest in evaluating treatment options to prepare for medical decisions (Exhibit 36), although the increase was not statistically significant (p=0.077). At the time of the first survey, 69 percent of consumers indicated interest in evaluating treatment options before making a medical decision (n=1,005). Interest increased to 74 percent at the time of the second survey (n=948). (Exhibit 36.)
Exhibit 36. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Interest in Evaluating Treatment Options before Making Medical Decisions from Wave 1 to Wave 2

There was a statistically significant increase in interest in learning about the EHC Program over time. As depicted in Exhibit 37, during the first survey (n=1,005), 44 percent indicated interest in learning more about the EHC Program. During the second survey (n=948), 58 percent indicated interest. This increase was significant with a statistical power of 100 percent at a 95 percent confidence level (p=0.0004).
Exhibit 37. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Interest in Learning about the EHC Program from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Return to Contents
5.3 Consumer Level of Behavior Change and Use of CER
5.3.1 Summary Table of Consumer Behavior Change and Use Longitudinal Findings
Exhibit 38 presents summary information for each of the variables tested and presented in this subsection.
Exhibit 38. Summary Table of Consumer Behavior Change and Use Longitudinal Findings
| Question |
Difference (Wave 2 - Wave 1) |
Confidence Interval |
P-Value |
Forest Plot |
| Intend to use AHRQ's consumer summaries or other studies that evaluate treatment options? |
0.064 |
(-0.006, 1) |
0.067 |
6.4% |
5.3.2 Consumer Behavior Change and Use Longitudinal Findings by Variable
In addition to an increased interest in the EHC Program, consumers reported an increased intention to use AHRQ's products or other studies to inform decisionmaking (Exhibit 39), although the increase was not statistically significant (p=0.067). As shown in Exhibit 39, during the first survey, 39 percent of consumers reported intention to use AHRQ's consumer summaries or other studies to prepare for a medical visit or medical decision (n=1,005). Forty-five percent of consumers reported intention to use such research at the time of the second survey (n=948).
Exhibit 39. Difference in Consumer Respondents' Intention to Use AHRQ's Consumer Summaries and Other Studies from Wave 1 to Wave 2

Return to Contents
Proceed to Next Section