Fax: (734) 936-8944
Original Article
Improving understanding of adjuvant therapy options by using simpler risk graphics†‡§¶‖
Article first published online: 14 NOV 2008
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23959
Published 2008 by the American Cancer Society
Additional Information
How to Cite
Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Fagerlin, A. and Ubel, P. A. (2008), Improving understanding of adjuvant therapy options by using simpler risk graphics. Cancer, 113: 3382–3390. doi: 10.1002/cncr.23959
- †
Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, October 20, 2008.
- ‡
The funding agreements ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, and publishing the report.
- §
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
- ¶
The authors would like to acknowledge Ellen Peters, Isaac Lipkus, and Mick Couper for helpful discussions and comments; Rosemarie Pitsch for her project management; and Bob Burbach and Aaron Pearlman for creating the risk graphics and for programming, testing, and implementing the survey.
- ‖
This article is a US Government work and, as such, is in the public domain in the United States of America.
Publication History
- Issue published online: 4 DEC 2008
- Article first published online: 14 NOV 2008
- Manuscript Accepted: 16 JUL 2008
- Manuscript Revised: 8 JUL 2008
- Manuscript Received: 2 APR 2008
Funded by
- National Institutes for Health. Grant Numbers: R01 CA87595, P50 CA101451
- American Cancer Society. Grant Number: MRSG-06-130-01-CPPB
- Merit Review Entry Program early career award from the Department of Veterans Affairs
REFERENCES
- 1,,, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003: CD001431.
- 2,,,. Decreased use of adjuvant breast cancer therapy in a randomized controlled trial of a decision aid with individualized risk information. Med Decis Making. 2005; 25: 301-307.
- 3,,,,. A decision aid to assist in adjuvant therapy choices for breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006; 15: 1001-0103.Direct Link:
- 4,,, et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 980-991.
- 5,,. Reducing the influence of anecdotal reasoning on people's health care decisions: is a picture worth a thousand statistics? Med Decis Making. 2005; 25: 398-405.
- 6,,, et al. Communicating side effect risks in a tamoxifen prophylaxis decision aid: the debiasing influence of pictographs. Patient Educ Couns. 2008; 73: 209–214.
- 7,,,,. Alternate methods of framing information about medication side effects: incremental risk versus total risk occurrence. J Health Commun. 2008; 13: 107-124.
- 8,,. Further insight into the perception of quantitative information: Judgments of gist in treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2007; 27: 34-43.
- 9,,,. Reducing aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2007; 13: 11-21.
- 10,,. Communicating risk information: the influence of graphical display format on quantitative information perception—accuracy, comprehension and preferences. Patient Educ Couns. 2007; 69: 121-128.
- 11. Understanding charts and graphs. Appl Cogn Psychol. 1989; 3: 185-226.Direct Link:
- 12. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, 2nd ed. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press; 2001.
- 13
- 14,,,,. Risk communication with patients with breast cancer: cautionary notes about printing Adjuvant! estimates. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9: 602-603.
- 15,. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science. 1985; 229: 828-833.
- 16,. Response latency as a signal to question problems in survey research. Public Opin Q. 1996; 60: 390-399.
- 17,,,,,. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the subjective numeracy scale (SNS). Med Decis Making. 2007; 27: 672-680.
- 18,,,. Validation of the subjective numeracy scale (SNS): Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Med Decis Making. 2007; 27: 663-671.
- 19,. Judging proportions with graphs: the summation model. Appl Cogn Psychol. 1998; 12: 173-190.Direct Link:
- 20,. Judgments of change and proportion in graphical perception. Hum Factors. 1992; 34: 313-334.
- 21,,,. Formats for improving risk communication in medical tradeoff decisions. J Health Commun. 2006; 11: 167-182.
- 22Stata Statistical Software, 10 ed. College Station, Texas: Stata Corporation; 2007.
- 23,,. The adaptive decision maker: effort and accuracy in choice. In: HogarthRM, ed. Insights in Decision Making: A Tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1990: 129-153.
- 24,,. Choice processing in emotionally difficult decisions. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1997; 23: 384-405.
- 25,. When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing? J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000; 79: 995-1006.
- 26,. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1998; 4: 75-100.
- 27,. The effect of available choice on the cognitive processing of pictures. Comput Human Behav. 2008; 24: 388-402.
- 28,,. Hope I die before I get old: mispredicting happiness across the lifespan. J Happiness Stud. 2006; 7: 167-182.
- 29,. Effects of quality and quantity of information on decision effectiveness. J Consum Res. 1987; 14: 200-213.
- 30. The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less. 1st ed. New York: Harper Collins; 2004.

1097-0142/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=ca681f5719430b26e1bc15e9ea4c9fc0a7110104)
1097-0142/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=8142566facf7e76aef9be6c51162a2e920b3b9f9)
1097-0142/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=a7299bc18f075294c232ade468773cd0672bd470)