Literature DB >> 26879804

Improving risk literacy in surgeons.

Rocio Garcia-Retamero1, Edward T Cokely2, Barbara Wicki3, Alexander Joeris3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To effectively practice evidence-based medicine, surgeons need to understand and be able to communicate health-relevant numerical information. We present the first study examining risk literacy in surgeons by assessing numeracy and surgical risk comprehension. Our study also investigated whether visual aids improve risk comprehension in surgeons with limited numeracy.
METHODS: Participants were 292 surgeons from 60 countries who completed an instrument measuring numeracy and evaluated the results of a randomized controlled trial including post-surgical side-effects. Half of the surgeons received this information in numbers. The other half received the information represented visually. Accuracy of risk estimation, reading latency, and estimate latency (i.e., deliberation) were assessed.
RESULTS: Some surgeons have low numeracy and could not correctly interpret surgical risks without additional support. Visual aids made risks transparent and eliminated differences in risk understanding between more and less numerate surgeons, increasing the amount of time that less numerate surgeons spent deliberating about risks.
CONCLUSIONS: Visual aids can be an efficient and inexpensive means of improving risk comprehension and clinical judgement in surgeons with low numerical and statistical skills. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Programs designed to help professionals represent and communicate health-relevant numerical information in simple transparent graphs may unobtrusively promote informed decision making.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Medical education; Numeracy; Risk communication; Risk literacy; Risk perception; Surgeons; Visual aids

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26879804     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.01.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  7 in total

1.  Evidence into practice: protocol for a new mixed-methods approach to explore the relationship between trials evidence and clinical practice through systematic identification and analysis of articles citing randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Benjamin E Byrne; Leila Rooshenas; Helen Lambert; Jane M Blazeby
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  How are risk ratios reported in orthopaedic surgery journals? A descriptive study of formats used to report absolute risks.

Authors:  Dafina Petrova; Alexander Joeris; María-José Sánchez; Elena Salamanca-Fernández; Rocio Garcia-Retamero
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-11-25       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Cancer screening risk literacy of physicians in training: An experimental study.

Authors:  Dafina Petrova; Guiliana Mas; Gorka Navarrete; Tania Tello Rodriguez; Pedro J Ortiz; Rocio Garcia-Retamero
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  When Does the Incremental Risk Format Aid Informed Medical Decisions? The Role of Learning, Feedback, and Number of Treatment Options.

Authors:  Kevin E Tiede; Felicia Ripke; Nicole Degen; Wolfgang Gaissmaier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2020-02-08       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Evaluation of statistical illiteracy in Latin American clinicians and the piloting evaluation of a short course across multiple timepoints.

Authors:  Adrian Soto-Mota; Eduardo Carrillo Maravilla; Jose Luis Cárdenas Fragoso; Óscar Arturo Lozano Cruz; Alfonso Gulías Herrero; Sergio Ponce De Leon Rosales
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  Revisiting the Open Sampling format: Improving risky choices through a novel graphical representation.

Authors:  Kevin E Tiede; Felix Henninger; Pascal J Kieslich
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-11-03

7.  A mixed methods case study investigating how randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are reported, understood and interpreted in practice.

Authors:  Ben E Byrne; Leila Rooshenas; Helen S Lambert; Jane M Blazeby
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 4.615

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.