Literature DB >> 19551490

Disclosure and rationality: comparative risk information and decision-making about prevention.

Peter H Schwartz1.   

Abstract

With the growing focus on prevention in medicine, studies of how to describe risk have become increasing important. Recently, some researchers have argued against giving patients "comparative risk information," such as data about whether their baseline risk of developing a particular disease is above or below average. The concern is that giving patients this information will interfere with their consideration of more relevant data, such as the specific chance of getting the disease (the "personal risk"), the risk reduction the treatment provides, and any possible side effects. I explore this view and the theories of rationality that ground it, and I argue instead that comparative risk information can play a positive role in decision-making. The criticism of disclosing this sort of information to patients, I conclude, rests on a mistakenly narrow account of the goals of prevention and the nature of rational choice in medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19551490     DOI: 10.1007/s11017-009-9111-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth        ISSN: 1386-7415


  16 in total

Review 1.  Effects of communicating individual risks in screening programmes: Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  Adrian Edwards; Silvana Unigwe; Glyn Elwyn; Kerenza Hood
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

2.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1974-09-27       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The role of risk and benefit perception in informed consent for surgery.

Authors:  A Lloyd; P Hayes; P R Bell; A R Naylor
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics.

Authors:  C H Braddock; K A Edwards; N M Hasenberg; T L Laidley; W Levinson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999 Dec 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: conclusions from a community-wide sample.

Authors:  N D Weinstein
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  1987-10

6.  Context and the interpretation of likelihood information: the role of intergroup comparisons on perceived vulnerability.

Authors:  Paul D Windschitl; René Martin; Annette R Flugstad
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2002-05

7.  Malady: a new treatment of disease.

Authors:  K D Clouser; C M Culver; B Gert
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 2.683

8.  How making a risk estimate can change the feel of that risk: shifting attitudes toward breast cancer risk in a general public survey.

Authors:  Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2005-06

9.  The ethics of information: absolute risk reduction and patient understanding of screening.

Authors:  Peter H Schwartz; Eric M Meslin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  The impact of personal and social comparison information about health risk.

Authors:  David P French; Stephen R Sutton; Theresa M Marteau; Ann Louise Kinmonth
Journal:  Br J Health Psychol       Date:  2004-05
View more
  4 in total

1.  Physical activity: the relative associations with cognitive and affective risk beliefs.

Authors:  Eva Janssen; Erika A Waters
Journal:  Psychol Health       Date:  2019-04-23

2.  Don't know responses to cognitive and affective risk perception measures: Exploring prevalence and socio-demographic moderators.

Authors:  Eva Janssen; Philippe Verduyn; Erika A Waters
Journal:  Br J Health Psychol       Date:  2018-02-02

3.  Comparative Risk: Good or Bad Heuristic?

Authors:  Peter H Schwartz
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 11.229

4.  Communicating tailored risk information of cancer treatment side effects: Only words or also numbers?

Authors:  Ruben D Vromans; Steffen C Pauws; Nadine Bol; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Emiel J Krahmer
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.796

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.