Confusing Relative Risk with Absolute Risk Is Associated with More Enthusiastic Beliefs about the Value of Cancer Screening

Tanner J. Caverly, Allan V. Prochazka, Ingrid A. Binswanger, Jean S. Kutner and Daniel D. Matlock

Medical Decision Making, 2014, vol. 34, issue 5, 686-692

Abstract: Background. Reviews of how data are presented in medical literature document that the benefit from an intervention is often exaggerated relative to the harm (e.g., relative risk for benefit and absolute risk for harm). Such mismatched presentations may create unwarranted enthusiasm, especially among those who misinterpret the statistics presented. The objective was to determine whether misinterpretation of risk data predicts enthusiasm for cancer screening. Methods. The authors administered a survey with 14 items assessing beliefs about cancer screening and 6 items measuring data interpretation ability. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the association between data interpretation and enthusiasm for cancer screening, with adjustment for gender and year graduated from medical school. Results. Eighty-eight of 139 physicians at a state-wide professional meeting returned completed surveys (63% response rate). Lower data interpretation scores were associated with higher enthusiasm for cancer screening scores ( P = 0.004) in the adjusted primary analysis. Confusing relative risk with absolute risk appeared to drive the overall association. Conclusions. Biased presentations of risk data could affect general beliefs about the value of cancer screening, especially among physicians who uncritically accept mismatched presentations of data.

Keywords: statistics; medical education; physicians; numeracy; risk communication (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X14526641 (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:34:y:2014:i:5:p:686-692

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14526641

Access Statistics for this article

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