A Randomized Comparison of Patients' Understanding of Number Needed to Treat and Other Common Risk Reduction Formats

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Volumn 18, Issue 11, 2003, Pages 884-892

  Sheridan, Stacey L ^a   Pignone, Michael P ^a,b   Lewis, Carmen L ^a,b  

^a IL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Data interpretation (statistical); Decision making; Numeracy; Patient participation (statistics and numerical data)

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MALE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PREVALENCE; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COMPREHENSION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RISK; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0345257156     PISSN: 08848734     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21102.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Institute of Medicine (US). Envisioning the National Health Care Quality Report. Washington, DC: The Institute: 2001.
2. Rajkumar S, Sampathkumar P, Gustafson A. Number needed to treat is a simple measure of treatment efficacy for clinicians. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:357-9.
3. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:966-72.
4. Laupacis A, Sackett D, Roberts R. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:1728-33.
5. Sackett D. Inference and decision at the bedside. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:309-16.
6. Hutton JL. Number needed to treat: properties and problems. J Royal Statist Soc A. 2000;163:403-19.
7. Hux JE, Naylor CD. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: does the format of efficacy data determine patients' acceptance of treatment? Med Decis Making. 1995;15:152-7.
8. Grimes DA, Snively GR. Patients' understanding of medical risks: implications for genetic counseling. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93:910-4.
9. Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Byram S, Fischhoff B, Welch H. A new scale for assessing perceptions of chance: a validation study. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:298-307.
10. Lipkus I, Samsa G, Rimer B. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001;21: 37-44.
11. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. How can we help people make sense of medical data? Eff Clin Prac. 1999;2:176-83.
12. Feldman-Stewart D, Kocovski N, McConnell BA, Brundage MD, Mackillop WJ. Perception of quantitative Information for treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:228-38.
13. McAlister F, Straus S, Guyatt G, Haynes RB. Users' guide to the medical literature XX. Integrating research evidence with the care of the individual patient. J Am Med Assoc. 2000,283:2829-36.
14. Rothman A, Salovey P, Antone C, Keough K, Martin CD. The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. J Exp Social Psychol. 1993;29:408-33.
15. Bobbio M, Demichelis B, Giustetto G. Completeness of reporting trial results: effect on physicians' willingness to prescribe. Lancet. 1994;343:1209-11.
16. Cranney M, Walley T. Same information, different decisions: the influence of evidence on the management of hypertension in the elderly. Br J Gen Pract. 1996;46:661-3.
17. Forrow L, Taylor WC, Arnold RM. Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions. Am J Med. 1992;92:121-4.
18. Bucher HC, Weinbacher M, Gyr K. Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration. BMJ. 1994;309:761-4.
19. Naylor CD, Chen E, Strauss B. Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness? Ann Intern Med. 1992;117:916-21.
20. Nikolajevic-Sarunac J, Henry DA, O'Connell DL, Robertson J. Effects of information framing on the intentions of family physicians to prescribe long-term hormone replacement therapy. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:591-8.
21. National Center for Education Statistics (US). Adult literacy in America: a first look at the findings of the national adult literacy survey. Washington, DC: US Department of Education; 1993.