The Inclusion of Patient Testimonials in Decision Aids

Peter A. Ubel, Christopher Jepson and Jonathan Baron
Additional contact information
Peter A. Ubel: Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine
Christopher Jepson: Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine
Jonathan Baron: Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania

Medical Decision Making, 2001, vol. 21, issue 1, 60-68

Abstract: Background . Decision aids often provide statistical information and patient testimonials to guide treatment choices. This raises the possibility that the testimonials will overwhelm the statistical information. Methods . Prospective jurors in Philadelphia County were presented with hypothetical statistical information about the percentage of angina patients who benefit from angioplasty and bypass surgery (50% and 75%, respectively). They were also given written testimonials from hypothetical patients who had benefited or not benefited from each of the two treatments. The numbers of patients benefiting and not benefiting were varied to be either proportionate to the statistical information or disproportionate. In study 1, all participants received 1 testimonial from a patient who had benefited from angioplasty and 1 from a patient who had not. Participants receiving the proportionate questionnaire version were also given 3 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass surgery and 1 from a patient who did not, coinciding with the hypothetical statistical information. In contrast, participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received only 1 testimonial from a patient who benefited from surgery and 1 from a patient who did not. In study 2, all participants received 2 examples of patients who benefited from angioplasty and 2 who did not. Participants with the proportionate questionnaire version received the same testimonials regarding surgery as in study 1. Those receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received 2 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass and 2 from patients who did not. Finally, a separate set of participants in study 2 received a questionnaire with no testimonials. Results . In study 1, 30% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 44% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P = 0.002 by X 2 ). In study 2, 34% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 37% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P= 0.59 by X 2 ). Of those receiving no patient testimonials, 58% chose bypass surgery. Conclusions . The inclusion of written patient testimonials significantly influenced hypothetical treatment choices. Efforts to make the mix of positive versus negative testimonials proportionate to statistical information may, under some circumstances, affect choices in ways that cannot automatically be assumed to be optimal.

Keywords: decision making; cognitive bias; decision aid; informed consent; vividness (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2001
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100108 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:1:p:60-68

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100108

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().