Crediting Treatments for Good Outcomes That Would Have Happened Anyway

F. Vogt, D. Mason and T. M. Marteau

Medical Decision Making, 2012, vol. 32, issue 2, 301-310

Abstract: Background . In some patient populations, many would experience good outcomes even if untreated (described as a small baseline risk). It appears that treatments for populations with small baseline risks are perceived as more effective than those for populations with large baseline risks: in essence, treatments are credited for good outcomes that would have happened anyway. Previous research failed to control for differences in treatment effects. Objective . To evaluate if the baseline risk of developing an acute condition influences the perceived effectiveness of preventive treatments besides the genuine treatment effect. Methods . In study 1 ( n = 1100) and study 2 ( n = 336), general population samples were shown information that systematically differed in size of treatment effect (absolute and relative risk reduction) and the size of the baseline risk of developing a condition. In study 3, medical students ( n = 110) were shown treatments that systematically differed in the size of the baseline risk of developing a condition and the type of condition to be prevented (i.e., migraines, heart disease, and pancreatic cancer). Measures included the perceived effectiveness of treatments, intentions to use these treatments, and numeracy. Results . The baseline risk of developing an acute condition influenced the perceived effectiveness of treatments (study 1: F 1,1043 = 66.17, P

Keywords: randomized trial methodology; risk factor evaluation; population-based studies; scale development/validation; conjoint analysis/discrete choice; scale development/validation; decision aids/tools; theories of utility (descriptive); psychometric methods/scaling; quality of life; oncology; outcomes research (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X11419858 (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:32:y:2012:i:2:p:301-310

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11419858

Access Statistics for this article

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