Patients prefer pictures to numbers to express cardiovascular benefit from treatment

Annals of Family Medicine

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 213-217

  Goodyear Smith, Felicity ^a   Arroll, Bruce ^a   Chan, Lydia ^a   Jackson, Rod ^a   Wells, Sue ^a   Kenealy, Timothy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Cardiovascular disease; Decision making; Drug therapy; Dyslipidemia; Patient education; Risk; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR;

ADULT; AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEART DISEASE; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEW ZEALAND; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RISK; SOCIOECONOMICS; VISUAL AID;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; AUDIOVISUAL AIDS; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; DECISION MAKING; DYSLIPIDEMIAS; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL-COA REDUCTASE INHIBITORS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW ZEALAND; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 44149085143     PISSN: 15441709     EISSN: 15441717     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1370/afm.795     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Alaszewski A. A person-centred approach to communicating risk. PLoS Med. 2005;2(2):e41.
2. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Stott N. Communicating risk reductions. Researchers should present results with both relative and absolute risks. BMJ. 1999;318(7183):603; author reply 603-604.
3. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Covey J, Matthews E, Pill R. Presenting risk information - a review of the effects of "framing" and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun. 2001;6(1):61-82.
4. 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(2):152-157.
5. Frich JC, Ose L, Malterud K, Fugelli P. Perceived vulnerability to heart disease in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia: a qualitative interview study. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(3):198-204.
6. Goldman RE, Parker DR, Eaton CB, et al. Patients' perceptions of cholesterol, cardiovascular disease risk, and risk communication strategies. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(3):205-212.
7. Bobbio M, Demichelis B, Giustetto G. Completeness of reporting trial results: effect on physicians' willingness to prescribe. Lancet. 1994;343(8907):1209-1211.
8. Epstein RM, Alper BS, Quill TE. Communicating evidence for participatory decision making. JAMA. 2004;291(19):2359-2366.
9. Alaszewski A, Horlick-Jones T. How can doctors communicate information about risk more effectively? BMJ. 2003;327(7417):728-731.
10. Edwards A, Unigwe S, Elwyn G, Hood K. Effects of communicating individual risks in screening programmes: Cochrane systematic review. BMJ. 2003;327(7417):703-709.
11. Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet. 1994;344(8934):1383-1389.
12. Gigerenzer G, Edwards A. Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight. BMJ. 2003;327(7417):741-744.
13. Gurm HS, Litaker DG. Framing procedural risks to patients: is 99% safe the same as a risk of 1 in 100? Acad Med. 2000;75(8):840-842.
14. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966-972.
15. Paling J. Strategies to help patients understand risks. BMJ. 2003;327(7417):745-748.