INTERPRETATION OF GRAPHIC DATA BY PATIENTS IN A GENERAL MEDICINE CLINIC

被引:42
作者
MAZUR, DJ
HICKAM, DH
机构
[1] Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (111-P), Portland, 97207, OR
关键词
cognitive attitudes; cognitive biases; framing effect; informed consent; medical decision making; preferences; summary data;
D O I
10.1007/BF02599425
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective:To assess how patients use graphic data to decide on preferences between alternative treatments. Design:Cross-sectional survey of patients, physicians, and medical students. The physicians and medical students served as a control group with which to compare the patients' responses. Setting:A university-based Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Participants:152 patients seen in a general medicine clinic, 57 medical students, and 11 physicians. Measurements and results:Subjects were given a survival graph showing the patient outcomes for two different unidentified treatments for an unidentified serious disease. They were asked to indicate which treatment they preferred and which portion(s) of the curves most influenced their preference. A large majority of both patients and health professionals preferred the treatment that had worse short-term and better long-term survival. Eleven percent of patients and 51% of health professionals identified mid-curve data (points other than the curve endpoints) as most influencing their preferences. Conclusions:A graphic survival curve appears to provide enough information to assess patient preferences between two alternative treatments. Patients appeared to differ from physicians and medical students in their interpretation of the curves. © 1990 Society of General Internal Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:402 / 405
页数:4
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]  
Mazur D.J., Hickam D.H., Treatment preferences of patients and physicians: influences of summary data when framing effects are controlled, Med Decis Making, 10, pp. 2-5, (1990)
[2]  
McNeil B.J., Pauker S.G., Sox H.C., Et al., On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies, New England Journal of Medicine, 306, pp. 1259-62, (1982)
[3]  
Mountain C.T., The relationship of prognosis to morphology and the anatomic extent of disease: studies of a new clinical staging system, Lung cancer: natural history, prognosis, and therapy, pp. 107-40, (1976)
[4]  
Mountain C.V., Carr D.T., Anderson W.A.D., A system for clinical staging of lung cancer, Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med, 120, pp. 130-8, (1974)
[5]  
Hilton G., Present position relating to cancer of the lung: results with radiotherapy alone, Thorax, 15, pp. 17-8, (1960)
[6]  
Fischhoff B., Slovic P., Lichtenstein S., Knowing what you want: measuring labile values, Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior, pp. 117-41, (1980)
[7]  
Kahneman D., Tversky A., Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica, 47, pp. 263-91, (1979)
[8]  
Tversky A., Kahneman D., The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice, Science, 211, pp. 453-8, (1981)
[9]  
Kahneman D., Tversky A., Choices, values, and frames, Am Psychologist, 39, pp. 341-50, (1984)
[10]  
O'Connor A.M.C., Boyd N.F., Trichler D.L., Et al., Eliciting preferences for alternative cancer drug treatments: the influence of framing, medium, and rater variables, Med Decis Making, 5, pp. 453-63, (1985)