Literature DB >> 16537286

Formats for improving risk communication in medical tradeoff decisions.

Erika A Waters1, Neil D Weinstein, Graham A Colditz, Karen Emmons.   

Abstract

To make treatment decisions, patients should consider not only a treatment option's potential consequences but also the probability of those consequences. Many laypeople, however, have difficulty using probability information. This Internet-based study (2,601 participants) examined a hypothetical medical tradeoff situation in which a treatment would decrease one risk but increase another. Accuracy was assessed in terms of the ability to determine correctly whether the treatment would increase or decrease the total risk. For these tradeoff problems, accuracy was greater when the following occurred: (1) the amount of cognitive effort required to evaluate the tradeoff was reduced; (2) probability information was presented as a graphical display rather than as text only; and (3) information was presented as percentages rather than as frequencies (n in 100). These findings provide suggestions of ways to present risk probabilities that may help patients understand their treatment options.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16537286     DOI: 10.1080/10810730500526695

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Commun        ISSN: 1081-0730


  38 in total

1.  Effect of various risk/benefit trade-offs on parents' understanding of a pediatric research study.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin; Terri Voepel-Lewis
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 2.  Rethinking health numeracy: a multidisciplinary literature review.

Authors:  Jessica S Ancker; David Kaufman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Emotion, Affect, and Risk Communication with Older Adults: Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Melissa L Finucane
Journal:  J Risk Res       Date:  2008

Review 4.  Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine.

Authors:  Denise M Lautenbach; Kurt D Christensen; Jeffrey A Sparks; Robert C Green
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 8.929

Review 5.  Risk as an attribute in discrete choice experiments: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Mark Harrison; Dan Rigby; Caroline Vass; Terry Flynn; Jordan Louviere; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  The effect of format on parents' understanding of the risks and benefits of clinical research: a comparison between text, tables, and graphics.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2010-07

7.  Explanations for side effect aversion in preventive medical treatment decisions.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Neil D Weinstein; Graham A Colditz; Karen Emmons
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 8.  How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making.

Authors:  Valerie F Reyna; Wendy L Nelson; Paul K Han; Nathan F Dieckmann
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 17.737

9.  Informing the uninformed: optimizing the consent message using a fractional factorial design.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Vijayan N Nair; Naveen N Narisetty; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 16.193

10.  What is my cancer risk? How internet-based cancer risk assessment tools communicate individualized risk estimates to the public: content analysis.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Helen W Sullivan; Wendy Nelson; Bradford W Hesse
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.