KOPS - The Institutional Repository of the University of Konstanz

Deceiving Numbers : Survival Rates and Their Impact on Doctor' Risk Communication

Aufgrund von Vorbereitungen auf eine neue Version von KOPS, können kommenden Montag und Dienstag keine Publikationen eingereicht werden. (Due to preparations for a new version of KOPS, no publications can be submitted next Monday and Tuesday.)

Deceiving Numbers : Survival Rates and Their Impact on Doctor' Risk Communication

Cite This

Files in this item

Checksum: MD5:38cb8ce20cfddc533a9c696aa9777cdc

WEGWARTH, Odette, Wolfgang GAISSMAIER, Gerd GIGERENZER, 2011. Deceiving Numbers : Survival Rates and Their Impact on Doctor' Risk Communication. In: Medical Decision Making. 31(3), pp. 386-394. ISSN 0272-989X. eISSN 1552-681X. Available under: doi: 10.1177/0272989X10391469

@article{Wegwarth2011-05Decei-28050, title={Deceiving Numbers : Survival Rates and Their Impact on Doctor' Risk Communication}, year={2011}, doi={10.1177/0272989X10391469}, number={3}, volume={31}, issn={0272-989X}, journal={Medical Decision Making}, pages={386--394}, author={Wegwarth, Odette and Gaissmaier, Wolfgang and Gigerenzer, Gerd} }

Background<br /><br />Increased 5-y survival for screened patients is often inferred to mean that fewer patients die of cancer. However, due to several biases, the 5-y survival rate is a misleading metric for evaluating a screening’s effectiveness. If physicians are not aware of these issues, informed screening counseling cannot take place.<br /><br />Methods<br />Two questionnaire versions ("Group" and "time") presented 4 conditions: 5-y survival (5Y), 5-y survival and annual disease-specific mortality (5YM), annual disease-specific mortality (M), and 5-y survival, annual disease-specific mortality, and incidence (5YMI). Questionnaire version "time" presented data as a comparison between 2 time points and version "group" as a comparison between a screened and an unscreened group. All data were based on statistics for the same cancer site (prostate). Outcome variables were the recommendation of screening, reason- ing behind recommendation, judgment of the screening's effectiveness, and, if judged effective, a numerical esti- mate of how many fewer people out of 1000 would die if screened regularly. After randomized allocation, 65 Ger- man physicians in internal medicine and its subspecial- ities completed either of the 2 questionnaire versions.<br /><br />Results<br />Across both versions, 66% of the physicians recommended screening when presented with 5Y, but only 8% of the same physicians made the recommenda- tion when presented with M (5YM: 31%; 5YMI: 55%). Also, 5Y made considerably more physicians (78%) judge the screening to be effective than any other condition (5YM: 31%; M: 5%; 5YMI: 49%) and led to the highest overestimations of benefit. Conclusion. A large number of physicians erroneously based their screening recommendation and judgment of screening's effectiveness on the 5-y survival rate. Results show that reporting disease-specific mortality rates can offer a simple solution to phy- sicians' confusion about the real effect of screening. Wegwarth, Odette 2014-07-04T08:25:02Z eng Gigerenzer, Gerd terms-of-use Wegwarth, Odette Gaissmaier, Wolfgang 2014-07-04T08:25:02Z Gigerenzer, Gerd 2011-05 Gaissmaier, Wolfgang Deceiving Numbers : Survival Rates and Their Impact on Doctor' Risk Communication Medical Decision Making ; 31 (2011), 3. - S. 386-394

Downloads since Oct 1, 2014 (Information about access statistics)

Wegwarth_280506.pdf 461

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Search KOPS


Browse

My Account