
Pictographic instructions for medications: do different cultures interpret them accurately?
Author(s) -
Kassam Rosemin,
Vaillancourt LCol Régis,
Collins John B.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
international journal of pharmacy practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.42
H-Index - 37
eISSN - 2042-7174
pISSN - 0961-7671
DOI - 10.1211/0022357044698
Subject(s) - pictogram , interpretation (philosophy) , meaning (existential) , interpretability , medicine , set (abstract data type) , comprehension , linguistics , cognitive psychology , psychology , computer science , philosophy , psychotherapist , programming language
Objective (1) To determine whether a range of linguistically diverse individuals of non‐European descent could understand the meaning of predeveloped pictograms without any additional aids such as verbal explanations; (2) to identify appropriate modifications to the pictograms to diminish errors of interpretation; and (3) to test the notion that central pictogram elements have the same meaning irrespective of language or culture. Setting The study was conducted in Vancouver, Canada. Method This study tested a set of 16 predeveloped pictograms to determine whether they accurately communicated the intended medication administration directions to participants who neither speak nor read English, French or Spanish. Both qualitative and quantitative methods evaluated the pictograms' interpretability among 39 participants from three language groups, Cantonese, Somali and Punjabi. Standard analysis of variance tested for differences due to language groups and other demographics. Key findings Only four of the 16 initial pictograms tested were interpreted correctly by 70% of participants. Relaxing the criterion from 70% to 50% included seven more. Modifications of problem elements within the pictograms further improved interpretation accuracy levels by 22%, to a final accuracy of 67.15%. Quantity errors were twice as common as timing, administration route or auxiliary instruction errors. Conclusions Participants could identify particular pictographic symbols they found confusing or ambiguous. Basic education and time since immigration predicted interpretation accuracy better than first language or any other demographic characteristic.