Risk Communication in Health

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Dateien
Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.
Datum
2012
Autor:innen
Bodemer, Nicolai
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Green
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Beitrag zu einem Sammelband
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
ROESER, Sabine, ed., Rafaela HILLERBRAND, ed., Per SANDIN, ed., Martin PETERSON, ed.. Handbook of Risk Theory. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012, pp. 621-660. ISBN 978-94-007-1432-8. Available under: doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_24
Zusammenfassung

Policy makers, health professionals, and patients have to understand health statistics to make informed medical decisions. However, health messages often follow a persuasive rather than an informative approach and undermine the idea of informed decision making. The current practice of health risk communication is often biased: Risks are communicated one sided and in nontransparent formats. Thereby, patients are misinformed and misled. Despite the fact that the public is often described as lacking basic statistical literacy skills, statistics can be presented in a way that facilitates understanding. In this chapter, we discuss how transparent risk communication can contribute to informed patients and how transparency can be achieved. Transparency requires formats that are easy to understand and present the facts objectively. For instance, using statistical evidence instead of narrative evidence helps patients to better assess and evaluate risks. Similarly, verbal probability estimates (e.g., “probable,” “rare”) usually result in incorrect interpretations of the underlying risk in contrast to numerical probability estimates (e.g., “20%,” “0.1”). Furthermore, we will explain and discuss four formats – relative risks, conditional probabilities, 5-year survival rates, and single-event probabilities – that often confuse people, and propose alternative formats – absolute risks, natural frequencies, annual mortality rates, and frequency statements – that increase transparency. Although research about graphs is still in its infancy, we discuss graphical visualizations as a promising tool to overcome low statistical literacy. A further challenge in risk communication is the communication of uncertainty. Evidence about medical treatments is often limited and conflicting, and the question arises how health professionals and laypeople deal with uncertainty. Finally, we propose further research to implement the concepts of transparency in risk communication.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
150 Psychologie
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690BODEMER, Nicolai, Wolfgang GAISSMAIER, 2012. Risk Communication in Health. In: ROESER, Sabine, ed., Rafaela HILLERBRAND, ed., Per SANDIN, ed., Martin PETERSON, ed.. Handbook of Risk Theory. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012, pp. 621-660. ISBN 978-94-007-1432-8. Available under: doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_24
BibTex
@incollection{Bodemer2012Commu-27920,
  year={2012},
  doi={10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_24},
  title={Risk Communication in Health},
  isbn={978-94-007-1432-8},
  publisher={Springer Netherlands},
  address={Dordrecht},
  booktitle={Handbook of Risk Theory},
  pages={621--660},
  editor={Roeser, Sabine and Hillerbrand, Rafaela and Sandin, Per and Peterson, Martin},
  author={Bodemer, Nicolai and Gaissmaier, Wolfgang}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/27920">
    <dcterms:title>Risk Communication in Health</dcterms:title>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:creator>Gaissmaier, Wolfgang</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/27920/1/Bodemer_279209.pdf"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:creator>Bodemer, Nicolai</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2014-05-28T06:39:46Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/27920/1/Bodemer_279209.pdf"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:issued>2012</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:contributor>Bodemer, Nicolai</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Gaissmaier, Wolfgang</dc:contributor>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/27920"/>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>Handbook of risk theory : epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk ; Band 2 / Sabine Roeser ... [et al.] (eds.). - Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer, 2012. - S. 621-660. - ISBN 978-94-007-1432-8</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2014-05-28T06:39:46Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Policy makers, health professionals, and patients have to understand health statistics to make informed medical decisions. However, health messages often follow a persuasive rather than an informative approach and undermine the idea of informed decision making. The current practice of health risk communication is often biased: Risks are communicated one sided and in nontransparent formats. Thereby, patients are misinformed and misled. Despite the fact that the public is often described as lacking basic statistical literacy skills, statistics can be presented in a way that facilitates understanding. In this chapter, we discuss how transparent risk communication can contribute to informed patients and how transparency can be achieved. Transparency requires formats that are easy to understand and present the facts objectively. For instance, using statistical evidence instead of narrative evidence helps patients to better assess and evaluate risks. Similarly, verbal probability estimates (e.g., “probable,” “rare”) usually result in incorrect interpretations of the underlying risk in contrast to numerical probability estimates (e.g., “20%,” “0.1”). Furthermore, we will explain and discuss four formats – relative risks, conditional probabilities, 5-year survival rates, and single-event probabilities – that often confuse people, and propose alternative formats – absolute risks, natural frequencies, annual mortality rates, and frequency statements – that increase transparency. Although research about graphs is still in its infancy, we discuss graphical visualizations as a promising tool to overcome low statistical literacy. A further challenge in risk communication is the communication of uncertainty. Evidence about medical treatments is often limited and conflicting, and the question arises how health professionals and laypeople deal with uncertainty. Finally, we propose further research to implement the concepts of transparency in risk communication.</dcterms:abstract>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Nein
Begutachtet
Diese Publikation teilen