Video vignettes do not yield higher engagement compared to a written variant in a vignette experiment to test communication in healthcare

Objectives: Experimental vignette designs are used to systematically test communication strategies in healthcare. To ensure validity, participants of such experiments need to optimally engage with the hypothetical scenario. Researchers have often favored video over written vignettes to maximize engagement, despite a lack of evidence for the superiority of videos. We sought further evidence to substantiate the choice for a vignette modality by testing the impact of video versus written vignette modality on engagement, perceived realism and anxiety among cancer patients and survivors. Methods: We performed an experimental study using video and written vignettes of a hypothetical physician-patient consultation in hematologic oncology. Cancer patients and survivors were recruited through two panels and participated via an online survey. The primary outcome was engagement, assessed using (an adapted version of) the ‘Video Engagement Scale’ short form. Secondary outcomes were perceived realism and state anxiety. Results: Mean engagement score (N = 270) was 3.44 (SD=0.77, potential range 1–5). Neither overall engagement scores, nor scores on the subscales ‘Immersion’ and ‘Emotional impact’ differed between video and written vignettes. No main effects were found for modality on perceived realism or state anxiety. Participant age, gender, and cancer history did not predict engagement, whereas source of recruitment (panel) did (p < .05). Conclusions: Written vignettes appear equally realistic and immersive compared to video vignettes. Future research could establish whether written and video vignettes differentially affect other outcomes and whether innovative virtual reality-based vignette modalities, which enable more interactive experiences, yield higher engagement.