Angela Fagerlin1, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher, Peter A Ubel. 1. VA Health Services Research & Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. fagerlin@umich.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test whether providing comparative risk information changes risk perceptions. METHODS:Two hundred and forty-nine female visitors to a hospital cafeteria were randomized to one of two conditions which differed in whether their hypothetical breast cancer risks was lower or higher than the average women's. Participants read a scenario describing a breast cancer prevention pill and indicated their: (1) likelihood of taking the pill and (2) perception of whether the pill provides breast cancer risk reduction. RESULTS: Women told that their hypothetical risk of breast cancer was above average were more likely to endorse taking the pill (2.79 vs. 2.23, F=4.95, p=0.002) and more likely to believe that the pill provided a significant risk reduction in breast cancer (3.15 vs. 2.73, F=4.32, p=0.005), even though the risks were equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Providing people with comparative risk information changes their risk perceptions. People who have above average risk may feel compelled to take a treatment because they are at above average risk and therefore may not thoroughly consider the trade-offs in the risks and benefits of treatment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians and decision aid developers must reconsider the practice of communicating "average risk" information to patients.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To test whether providing comparative risk information changes risk perceptions. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-nine female visitors to a hospital cafeteria were randomized to one of two conditions which differed in whether their hypothetical breast cancer risks was lower or higher than the average women's. Participants read a scenario describing a breast cancer prevention pill and indicated their: (1) likelihood of taking the pill and (2) perception of whether the pill provides breast cancer risk reduction. RESULTS:Women told that their hypothetical risk of breast cancer was above average were more likely to endorse taking the pill (2.79 vs. 2.23, F=4.95, p=0.002) and more likely to believe that the pill provided a significant risk reduction in breast cancer (3.15 vs. 2.73, F=4.32, p=0.005), even though the risks were equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Providing people with comparative risk information changes their risk perceptions. People who have above average risk may feel compelled to take a treatment because they are at above average risk and therefore may not thoroughly consider the trade-offs in the risks and benefits of treatment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians and decision aid developers must reconsider the practice of communicating "average risk" information to patients.
Authors: M H Gail; J P Costantino; J Bryant; R Croyle; L Freedman; K Helzlsouer; V Vogel Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-11-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: J Cuzick; J Forbes; R Edwards; M Baum; S Cawthorn; A Coates; A Hamed; A Howell; T Powles Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-09-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Umberto Veronesi; Patrick Maisonneuve; Nicole Rotmensz; Alberto Costa; Virgilio Sacchini; Roberto Travaglini; Giuseppe D'Aiuto; Francesco Lovison; Giacomo Gucciardo; Maria Grazia Muraca; Maria Antonietta Pizzichetta; Serafino Conforti; Andrea Decensi; Chris Robertson; Peter Boyle Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2003-01-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Michael L Volk; Rachel S Tocco; Shawn J Pelletier; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Anna S F Lok Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Ana S Iltis; Sahana Misra; Laura B Dunn; Gregory K Brown; Amy Campbell; Sarah A Earll; Anne Glowinski; Whitney B Hadley; Ronald Pies; James M Dubois Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Kimberly A Fisher; Andy S L Tan; Daniel D Matlock; Barry Saver; Kathleen M Mazor; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2018-08-06