Risk estimates from an Online risk calculator are more believable and recalled better when expressed as integers

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2011, Pages

  Witteman, Holly O ^a,b   Zikmund Fisher, Brian J ^a,b   Waters, Erika A ^c   Gavaruzzi, Teresa ^d,e   Fagerlin, Angela ^a,b,f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^f VA Ann Arbor Center for Clinical Management Research   (United States)

Author keywords

Calculators; Communication; Internet; Online; Perception; Programmable; Risk; Risk assessment; Risk calculator; Risk communication; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MALE; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DATA DISPLAY; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80053521902     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1656     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. AIDSGAME.com. 2006. Free HIV test URL: http://www.aidsgame.com/quick-hiv- test.aspx [accessed 2010-08-27] [WebCite Cache ID 5sJFwZRw5]
2. National Cancer Institute. US National Institutes of Health. 2008. Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool URL: http://www.cancer.gov/bcrisktool/Default.aspx [accessed 2010-08-27] [WebCite Cache ID 5sJI5gxyx]
3. Mayo Clinic staff. MayoClinic.com. 2010. Heart Disease Risk Calculator URL: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/heart-disease-risk/HB00047 [accessed 2010-08-27] [WebCite Cache ID 5sJI9IzJ4]
4. National Cholesterol Education Program. NCEP. Risk Assessment Tool for Estimating Your 10-Year Risk of Having a Heart Attack URL: http://hp2010. nhlbihin.net/atpiii/calculator.asp [accessed 2011-01-11] [WebCite Cache ID 5verTeAnJ]
5. American Diabetes Association. ADA. 2009. My Health Advisor URL: http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/prevention/my-health-advisor/[accessed 2011-01-11] [WebCite Cache ID 5verMk5A1]
6. American Diabetes Association. ADA. 2010. Diabetes Risk Test URL: http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/prevention/diabetes-risk-test/[accessed 2010-08-27] [WebCite Cache ID 5sJIBdASq]
7. Prostate Cancer Canada. PCATs to Predict the Odds a Biopsy Will Find Prostate Cancer. no date URL: http://www.prostatecancer.ca/Tools/local/files/ english/calculator/calculator.html [accessed 2010-08-27] [WebCite Cache ID 5sJIYQstv]
8. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. 2011. Prostate Cancer Nomograms: Post-Radical Prostatectomy URL: http://nomograms.mskcc.org/prostate/ PostRadicalProstatectomy.aspx [accessed 2011-07-26] [WebCite Cache ID 60THUhRZP]
9. Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine.2007. Your Disease Risk URL: http://www.yourdiseaserisk. wustl.edu/[accessed 2010-08-28] [WebCite Cache ID 5sKKj9DAr]
10. Holmberg C, Harttig U, Schulze MB, Boeing H. The potential of the Internet for health communication: the use of an interactive on-line tool for diabetes risk prediction. Patient Educ Couns 2011 Apr;83(1):106-112. [doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.04.021] [Medline: 20547029]
11. Waters EA, Sullivan HW, Nelson W, Hesse BW. What is my cancer risk? How internet-based cancer risk assessment tools communicate individualized risk estimates to the public: content analysis. J Med Internet Res 2009;11(3):e33 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.1222] [Medline: 19674958]
12. Halls SB. Detailed Breast Cancer Risk Calculator. 2008. URL: http://www.halls.md/breast/risk.htm [accessed 2010-09-20] [WebCite Cache ID 5ssU7pe8d]
13. GenneX Healthcare Technologies, Inc. 1999. Breast Cancer Risk URL: http://www.estronaut.com/a/breastInteractive2.htm [accessed 2010-09-20] [WebCite Cache ID 60TF7An03]
14. Nelson W, Reyna VF, Fagerlin A, Lipkus I, Peters E. Clinical implications of numeracy: theory and practice. Ann Behav Med 2008 Jun;35(3):261-274. [doi: 10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8] [Medline: 18677452]
15. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Byram S, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. A new scale for assessing perceptions of chance: a validation study. Med Decis Making 2000;20(3):298-307. [Medline: 10929852] (Pubitemid 30470725)
16. Weinstein ND. What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999(25):15-20. [Medline: 10854451]
17. Yamagishi K. When a 12.86% mortality is more dangerous than 24.14%: implications for risk communication. Appl Cogn Psychol 1997;11(6):495-506. [doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199712)11:63.0.CO;2-J] (Pubitemid 127523258)
18. Denes-Raj V, Epstein S. Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol 1994 May;66(5):819-829. [Medline: 8014830]
19. Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making 2007;27(5):696-713. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X07307271] [Medline: 17873259] (Pubitemid 47547606)
20. Cuite CL, Weinstein ND, Emmons K, Colditz G. A test of numeric formats for communicating risk probabilities. Med Decis Making 2008;28(3):377-384. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X08315246] [Medline: 18480036] (Pubitemid 351713304)
21. Janiszewski C, Uy D. Precision of the anchor influences the amount of adjustment. Psychol Sci 2008 Feb;19(2):121-127. [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008. 02057.x] [Medline: 18271859]
22. Zhang C, Schwarz N. The granularity effect. In: Proceedings. 2011 Presented at: The Society for Consumer Psychology 2011 Winter Conference; Feb 24-26, 2011; Atlanta, GA, USA.
23. Schindler RM, Kirby PN. Patterns of rightmost digits used in advertised prices: implications for nine-ending effects. Journal of Consumer Research 1997;24(2):192-201. [doi: 10.1086/209504]
24. Stiving M. Price-endings when prices signal quality. Management Science 2000;46(12):1617-1629. [doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1617.12078] (Pubitemid 32138395)
25. Sonnemans J. Price clustering and natural resistance points in the Dutch stock market: a natural experiment. European Economic Review 2006;50(8):1937-1950. [doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2005.09.001] (Pubitemid 44509742)
26. Han PK, Klein WM, Lehman TC, Massett H, Lee SC, Freedman AN. Laypersons' responses to the communication of uncertainty regarding cancer risk estimates. Med Decis Making 2009;29(3):391-403. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X08327396] [Medline: 19470720]
27. Han PK, Klein WM, Lehman T, Killam B, Massett H, Freedman AN. Communication of uncertainty regarding individualized cancer risk estimates: effects and influential factors. Med Decis Making 2011;31(2):354-366. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X10371830] [Medline: 20671211]
28. Weinstein ND. Perceived probability, perceived severity, and health-protective behavior. Health Psychol 2000 Jan;19(1):65-74. [Medline: 10711589]
29. Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Waldron W, et al, editors. SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2007. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2010. Table 1.14, Lifetime Risk URL: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/ 1975-2007/[accessed 2010-09-20] [WebCite Cache ID 60TFi28C3]
30. Fuhrel-Forbis A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Exe N, Kahn V, Witteman H, Jankovic A, et al. Imprecise definitions of "precise": preferences for precision depend on context. 2011 Presented at: Annual Meeting of the Society of Medical Decision Making; October 24-27, 2010; Toronto, ON, Canada. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X10393877]
31. SSI Survey Sampling International. SSI. 2010. SSI Verify URL: http://www.surveysampling.com/en/ssi-verify [accessed 2010-11-11] [WebCite Cache ID 5uAWKnAYa]
32. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA, Jankovic A, Derry HA, Smith DM. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Med Decis Making 2007;27(5):672-680. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449] [Medline: 17641137] (Pubitemid 47547594)
33. Champion VL, Skinner CS, Menon U, Rawl S, Giesler RB, Monahan P, et al. A breast cancer fear scale: psychometric development. J Health Psychol 2004 Nov;9(6):753-762. [doi: 10.1177/1359105304045383] [Medline: 15367754] (Pubitemid 39425361)
34. Miles A, Voorwinden S, Mathews A, Hoppitt LC, Wardle J. Cancer fear and the interpretation of ambiguous information related to cancer. Cognition & Emotion 2009;23(4):701-713. [doi: 10.1080/02699930802091116]
35. Gosling SD, Rentfrow PJ, Swann WB. A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality 2003;37:504-528. [doi: 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1] (Pubitemid 37445626)
36. Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making 2001;21(1):37-44. [Medline: 11206945] (Pubitemid 32245029)
37. Hoffrage U, Lindsey S, Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G. Communicating statistical information. Science 2000 Dec 22;290(5500):2261-2262. [Medline: 11188724] (Pubitemid 32041554)
38. Peters E, Västfjäll D, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Mazzocco K, Dickert S. Numeracy and decision making. Psychol Sci 2006 May;17(5):407-413. [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01720.x] [Medline: 16683928] (Pubitemid 43657915)
39. Walker VR. Direct Inference, Probability, and a Conceptual Gulf in Risk Communication. Risk Analysis 1995;15:603-609. [doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995. tb00756.x]
40. Harle CA, Downs JS, Padman R. A clustering approach to segmenting users of internet-based risk calculators. Methods Inf Med 2011 May 13;50(3):244-252. [doi: 10.3414/ME09-01-0080] [Medline: 20300681]
41. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. How making a risk estimate can change the feel of that risk: shifting attitudes toward breast cancer risk in a general public survey. Patient Educ Couns 2005 Jun;57(3):294-299. [doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.08.007] [Medline: 15893211] (Pubitemid 40694008)
42. Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. A demonstration of ''less can be more'' in risk graphics. Med Decis Making 2010;30(6):661-671. [doi: 10.1177/0272989X10364244] [Medline: 20375419]
43. Peters E, Dieckmann N, Dixon A, Hibbard JH, Mertz CK. Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Med Care Res Rev 2007 Apr;64(2):169-190. [doi: 10.1177/10775587070640020301] [Medline: 17406019] (Pubitemid 46570715)