Strengths and Gaps in Physicians’ Risk Communication: A Scenario Study of the Influence of Numeracy on Cancer Screening Communication

Dafina Petrova, Olga Kostopoulou, Brendan C. Delaney, Edward T. Cokely and Rocio Garcia-Retamero
Additional contact information
Dafina Petrova: Mind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
Olga Kostopoulou: Department of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, England, UK
Brendan C. Delaney: Department of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, England, UK
Edward T. Cokely: National Institute for Risk & Resilience, and Department of Psychology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Rocio Garcia-Retamero: Mind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Medical Decision Making, 2018, vol. 38, issue 3, 355-365

Abstract: Objective. Many patients have low numeracy, which impedes their understanding of important information about health (e.g., benefits and harms of screening). We investigated whether physicians adapt their risk communication to accommodate the needs of patients with low numeracy, and how physicians’ own numeracy influences their understanding and communication of screening statistics. Methods. UK family physicians ( N = 151) read a description of a patient seeking advice on cancer screening. We manipulated the level of numeracy of the patient (low v. high v. unspecified) and measured physicians’ risk communication, recommendation to the patient, understanding of screening statistics, and numeracy. Results. Consistent with best practices, family physicians generally preferred to use visual aids rather than numbers when communicating information to a patient with low (v. high) numeracy. A substantial proportion of physicians (44%) offered high quality (i.e., complete and meaningful) risk communication to the patient. This was more often the case for physicians with higher (v. lower) numeracy who were more likely to mention mortality rates, OR=1.43 [1.10, 1.86], and harms from overdiagnosis, OR=1.44 [1.05, 1.98]. Physicians with higher numeracy were also more likely to understand that increased detection or survival rates do not demonstrate screening effectiveness, OR=1.61 [1.26, 2.06]. Conclusions. Most physicians know how to appropriately tailor risk communication for patients with low numeracy (i.e., with visual aids). However, physicians who themselves have low numeracy are likely to misunderstand the risks and unintentionally mislead patients by communicating incomplete information. High-quality risk communication and shared decision making can depend critically on factors that improve the risk literacy of physicians.

Keywords: cancer screening; numeracy; risk communication (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X17729359 (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:38:y:2018:i:3:p:355-365

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17729359

Access Statistics for this article

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