Nurses as information providers: Facilitating understanding and communication of statistical information

Nurse Education Today

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 236-243

  Hanoch, Yaniv ^a,b   Pachur, Thorsten ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

(In) numeracy; Decision making; Genetic counselling; Information providers; Natural frequencies; Probabilities; Screening

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

BAYES THEOREM; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; COMPETENCE; COMPREHENSION; EDUCATION PROGRAM; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NURSE PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; NURSING EDUCATION; PATIENT COUNSELING; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SKILL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 1842503995     PISSN: 02606917     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2004.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. American Association of Colleges of Nursing n.d. Retrieved November 22, 2003. Available from http://www.aacn. nche.edu/%2Feducation%2Fcareer.htm.
2. Bush, P.J., Osterweis, M., 1978. Pathways to medicine use. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 19, 179-189.
3. Casscells, W., Schoenberger, A., Grayboys, T., 1978. Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results. New England Journal of Medicine 299, 999-1000.
4. Chan, E., Sulmasy, D.P., 1998. What should men know about prostate-specific antigen screening before giving informed consent? American Journal of Medicine 105, 266-274.
5. Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., 1996. Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition 58, 1-73.
6. Croyle, R.T., Lerman, C., 1999. Risk communication in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs 25, 59-66.
7. Daston, L.J., 1988. Classical Probabilities in the Enlightenment. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
8. DoH, 2003. Our Inheritance, Our Future - Realising the Potential of Genetics in the NHS. HMSO, London.
9. Eddy, D.M., 1982. Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities. In: Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristic and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 249-267.
10. Edwards, A., Matthews, E., Pill, R., Bloor, M., 1998. Communication about risk: Diversity among primary care professionals. Family Practice 15 (4), 296-300.
11. Ellis, P.M., Tattersall, M.H.N., 1999. How should doctors communicate the diagnosis of cancer to patients? Annals of Medicine 31 (5), 336-341.
12. Emery, J., Hayflick, S., 2001. The challenge of integrating genetic medicine into primary care. British Medical Journal 322, 1027-1030.
13. Erev, I., Cohen, B.L., 1990. Verbal versus numerical probabilities: Efficiency, biases and the preference paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making 9, 153-172.
14. Evans, J.P., Skrzynia, C., Burke, W., 2001. The complexities of predictive genetic testing. British Medical Journal 322, 1052-1056.
15. Gigerenzer, G., Edwards, A., 2003. Simple tools for understanding risks: From innumeracy to insight. British Medical Journal 327, 741-744.
16. Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., 1995. How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency format. Psychological Review 102 (4), 684-704.
17. Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., Ebert, A., 1998. Aids counselling for low-risk clients. Aids Care 10, 197-211.
18. Hallowell, N., 2000. A qualitative study of the information needs of high-risk women undergoing prophylactic oophorectomy. Psycho-Oncology 9, 486-495.
19. Hallowell, N., Statham, H., Murton, F., Green, J., Richards, M., 1997. "Talking about chance": the presentation of risk information during genetic counseling for breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling 6, 269-286.
20. Hoffrage, U., Gigerenzer, G., Krauss, S., Martignon, L., 2002. Representation facilitates reasoning: What natural frequencies are and what they are not. Cognition 84, 343-352.
21. Hoffrage, U., Kurzenhäuser, S., Gigerenzer, G., in press. Understanding benefits and risks: Why the representation of statistical information matters. In: Bibace, R., Laird, J., Noller, K. D., Valsiner, J. (Eds.), Heuristics and values: Relating the Universals and the Particulars in Thinking About Health. Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, CT.
22. Hoffrage, U., Lindsey, S., Hertwig, R., Gigerenzer, G., 2000. Communicating statistical information. Science 290, 2261-2262.
23. Hofman, K.J., Tambor, E.S., Chase, G.A., Geller, G., Faden, R.R., Holtzman, N.A., 1993. Physician's knowledge of genetics and genetic tests. Academic Medicine 68, 625-632.
24. Howie, J.G.R., Heaney, D.J., Maxwell, M., Walker, J.J., Freeman, G.K., Rai, H., 1999. Quality at general practice consultations: cross sectional survey. British Medical Journal 319, 738-743.
25. Kirk, M., McDonald, K., Longley, Iredale R., 2003. Fit for practice in the genetics era: Defining what nurses, midwives and health visitors should know and be able to do in relation to genetics. Genomics Policy Unit, University of Glamorgan.
26. Kurzenhäuser, S., Hoffrage, U., 2002. Teaching Bayesian reasoning: An evaluation of a classroom tutorial for medical students. Medical Teacher 24 (5), 516-521.
27. Lashley, F.R., 1999. Genetic testing, screening, and counseling issues in cardiovascular disease. The Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing 13 (14), 110-126.
28. Lea, D.H., 2000. A clinician's primer in human genetics. Nursing clinics of North America 35 (3), 583-614.
29. Lea, D.H., Tinley, S.T., 1998. Genetics in the OR: implications for perioperative nursing practice. AORN Journal 67 (6), 1175-1180.
30. Lessick, M., Anderson, L., 2000. Genetic discoveries: challenges for nurses who care for children and their families. Journal of the Society of Pediatric Nurses 5 (1), 47-51.
31. Ley, P., 1982. Satisfaction, compliance, and communication. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 21, 241-254.
32. Lidz, C.W., Meisel, A., Zerubavel, E., 1984. Informed Consent: A Study of Decision Making in Psychiatry. The Guilford Press, New York.
33. Lipkus, I.M., Samsa, G., Rimer, B.K., 2001. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making 21, 37-44.
34. Maguire, P., 1999. Improving communication with cancer patients. European Journal of Cancer 35 (14), 2058-2065.
35. McManus, R.J., Mant, J., Meulendijks, C.F.M., Salter, R.A., Pattison, H.M., Roalfe, A.K., Hobbs, F.D.R., 2002. Comparison of estimates and calculations of risk of coronary heart disease by doctors and nurses using different calculation tools in general practice: Cross sectional study. British Medical Journal 324, 459-464.
36. Newell, G.R., Vogel, V.G., 1988. Personal risk factors: What do they mean? Cancer 62 (8), 1695-1701.
37. Olsen, O., Gøtzsche, P.C., 2001. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet 358, 340-342.
38. Reyna, V.F., 2001. Genetic testing and medical decision making. Archive of Internal Medicine 161, 2406-2408.
39. Schwartz, L.M., Woloshin, S., Black, W.C., Welch, G., 1997. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine 127, 966-972.
40. Sedlmeier, P., 1997. BasicBayes: A tutor system for simple Bayesian inference. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 29, 328-336.
41. Sedlmeier, P., Gigerenzer, G., 2001. Teaching Bayesian reasoning in less than two hours. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 3, 380-400.
42. Stoltzfus, P.K., Rust, D., Reid, T., 2001. Molecular cytogenetics and gene analysis: Implications for oncology nurses. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing 5 (5), 201-206.
43. Taylor, S., 2002. Health Psychology, fifth ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
44. Taylor, S., Muncer, S., 2000. Redressing the power and effect of significance. A new approach to an old problem: Teaching statistics to nursing students. Nurse Education Today 20, 358-364.
45. Tzeng, H.M., Ketefian, S., 2003. Demand for nursing competencies: An exploratory study in Taiwan's hospital system. Journal of Clinical Nursing 14 (4), 509-518.
46. Valanis, B., 2000. Professional nursing practice in an HMO: the future is now. Journal of Nurse Education 39 (1), 13-20.
47. Wear, S., 1993. Informed Consent: Patient Autonomy and Physician Beneficence within Clinical Medicine. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
48. Weinstein, N.J., 1999. What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs 25, 15-20.
49. Williams, J.K., 1998. Genetic testing: Implications for professional nursing. Journal of Professional Nursing 14 (3), 184-188.
50. Wivell, G., Denton, E.R.E., Eve, C.B., Inglis, J.C., Harvey, I., 2003. Can radiographers read screening mammograms. Clinical Radiology 58, 63-67.