Literature DB >> 8271086

The framing effect of relative and absolute risk.

D J Malenka1, J A Baron, S Johansen, J W Wahrenberger, J M Ross.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test whether a patient's perception of benefit is influenced by whether the benefit is presented in relative or absolute terms.
DESIGN: Questionnaire-based study.
SETTING: A general medicine outpatient clinic at a rural tertiary care center associated with a medical school. PATIENTS: 470 of 511 consecutive patients who agreed to answer a questionnaire while waiting for their clinic visit. Mean age was 49.1 years, 62.1% were female, and 51.9% had at least one year of education beyond high school. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient response to the choice of two equally efficacious medications for the management of a hypothetical serious disease. The benefit of one medication was stated in relative terms, the other in absolute terms. Patients could choose either medication alone, indicate indifference to the choice of medication, or choose not to answer. MAIN
RESULTS: 56.8% of the patients chose the medication whose benefit was in relative terms. 14.7% chose the medication whose benefit was in absolute terms. Only 15.5% were indifferent to the choice of medication. The patients preferred the medication whose benefit was in relative terms across a wide range of ages and educational levels. Further questioning suggested that the patients thought benefit was greater when expressed in relative terms because they ignored the underlying risk of disease and assumed it was one.
CONCLUSIONS: The "framing" of benefit (or risk) in relative versus absolute terms may have a major influence on patient preference.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8271086     DOI: 10.1007/bf02599636

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  13 in total

1.  Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions.

Authors:  L Forrow; W C Taylor; R M Arnold
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.965

2.  Estimates of absolute cause-specific risk in cohort studies.

Authors:  J Benichou; M H Gail
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

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

4.  Clinical judgment: psychological research and medical practice.

Authors:  A S Elstein
Journal:  Science       Date:  1976-11-12       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment.

Authors:  A Laupacis; D L Sackett; R S Roberts
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1988-06-30       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies.

Authors:  B J McNeil; S G Pauker; H C Sox; A Tversky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1982-05-27       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1981-01-30       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferences.

Authors:  A M O'Connor; N F Boyd; P Warde; L Stolbach; J E Till
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

9.  Assessment of patients' preferences for therapeutic outcomes.

Authors:  S A Eraker; H C Sox
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 10.  Effect of risk status on treatment criteria. Implications of hypertension trials.

Authors:  W S Browner; S B Hulley
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 10.190

View more
  79 in total

Review 1.  The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians.

Authors:  P McGettigan; K Sly; D O'Connell; S Hill; D Henry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts: improving but not optimal.

Authors:  Eric Dryver; Janet E Hux
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  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

4.  Strategies to help patients understand risks.

Authors:  John Paling
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

Review 5.  Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat.

Authors:  Alexandra Barratt; Peter C Wyer; Rose Hatala; Thomas McGinn; Antonio L Dans; Sheri Keitz; Virginia Moyer; Gordon Guyatt For
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-08-17       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Patient Perspectives on Therapeutic Options for IBD.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2007-12

7.  Preference of endoscopic ablation over medical prevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma by patients with Barrett's esophagus.

Authors:  Patrick Yachimski; Sachin Wani; Tonya Givens; Eric Howard; Tina Higginbotham; Angie Price; Kenneth Berman; Lindsay Hosford; Paul Menard Katcher; Elissa Ozanne; Katherine Perzan; Chin Hur
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 11.382

8.  Does informed consent alter elderly patients' preferences for colorectal cancer screening? Results of a randomized trial.

Authors:  A M Wolf; J B Schorling
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 9.  Describing treatment effects to patients.

Authors:  Annette Moxey; Dianne O'Connell; Patricia McGettigan; David Henry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  A proposal for an additional clinical trial outcome measure assessing preventive effect as delay of events.

Authors:  Per Lytsy; Lars Berglund; Johan Sundström
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 8.082

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.