An evaluation of the graphical literacy of Annals of Emergency Medicine☆☆☆★

Abstract 

Study Objective: To describe the type, quantity, and quality of graphics used to present original research in Annals of Emergency Medicine. Methods: We performed a blinded, retrospective review of all graphics published in Annals of Emergency Medicine’s original research articles from January 1998 through June 1999. We assessed the types of graphics, the use of special features to display detail, the clarity of each graphic, discrepancies within the graphic or between the graphic and text, and the efficiency of data presentation. Results: Forty-six percent (68/147) of original research communications contained at least 1 graphic. Of the 128 graphics in these 68 articles, simple univariate displays predominated (53%). Only one third of graphics displayed by-subject data through the use of one-way plots, scatter plots, or other formats. Graphics generally defined all symbols and abbreviations (99%) and were self-explanatory (88%). Techniques for conveying the richness of a data set were seldom used (11% of all graphics). Forty percent (51/128) of the graphics contained internal contradictions (15%), muddled displays (19%), numeric distortion (5%), nonstandard graphing conventions (7%), and other lapses in design or execution. Inefficiencies of data presentation included internal redundancy (16%), extraneous decoration (10%), and redundancy of graphic data with other text/tables (15%). Conclusion: The majority of graphics in Annals of Emergency Medicine, although internally valid, failed to take full advantage of the graphic’s potential and often depicted summary data when portrayal of subject-specific data was possible. To help readers fully understand research findings, authors and editors should take care to ensure that graphics efficiently and effectively portray the optimal amount of information. [Cooper RJ, Schriger DL, Tashman DA. An evaluation of the graphical literacy of Annals of Emergency Medicine. Ann Emerg Med. January 2001;37:13-19.]