TY - JOUR
T1 - Current Best Practice for Presenting Probabilities in Patient Decision Aids
T2 - Fundamental Principles
AU - Bonner, Carissa
AU - Trevena, Lyndal J.
AU - Gaissmaier, Wolfgang
AU - Han, Paul K.J.
AU - Okan, Yasmina
AU - Ozanne, Elissa
AU - Peters, Ellen
AU - Timmermans, Daniëlle
AU - Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J.
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to acknowledge the authors of the previous review on which this article is based, who were not able to contribute to the update. The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was completed with no external funding. The authors received their usual salaries from the organizations outlined under affiliations.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2021.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Background: Shared decision making requires evidence to be conveyed to the patient in a way they can easily understand and compare. Patient decision aids facilitate this process. This article reviews the current evidence for how to present numerical probabilities within patient decision aids. Methods: Following the 2013 review method, we assembled a group of 9 international experts on risk communication across Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We expanded the topics covered in the first review to reflect emerging areas of research. Groups of 2 to 3 authors reviewed the relevant literature based on their expertise and wrote each section before review by the full authorship team. Results: Of 10 topics identified, we present 5 fundamental issues in this article. Although some topics resulted in clear guidance (presenting the chance an event will occur, addressing numerical skills), other topics (context/evaluative labels, conveying uncertainty, risk over time) continue to have evolving knowledge bases. We recommend presenting numbers over a set time period with a clear denominator, using consistent formats between outcomes and interventions to enable unbiased comparisons, and interpreting the numbers for the reader to meet the needs of varying numeracy. Discussion: Understanding how different numerical formats can bias risk perception will help decision aid developers communicate risks in a balanced, comprehensible manner and avoid accidental “nudging” toward a particular option. Decisions between probability formats need to consider the available evidence and user skills. The review may be useful for other areas of science communication in which unbiased presentation of probabilities is important.
AB - Background: Shared decision making requires evidence to be conveyed to the patient in a way they can easily understand and compare. Patient decision aids facilitate this process. This article reviews the current evidence for how to present numerical probabilities within patient decision aids. Methods: Following the 2013 review method, we assembled a group of 9 international experts on risk communication across Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We expanded the topics covered in the first review to reflect emerging areas of research. Groups of 2 to 3 authors reviewed the relevant literature based on their expertise and wrote each section before review by the full authorship team. Results: Of 10 topics identified, we present 5 fundamental issues in this article. Although some topics resulted in clear guidance (presenting the chance an event will occur, addressing numerical skills), other topics (context/evaluative labels, conveying uncertainty, risk over time) continue to have evolving knowledge bases. We recommend presenting numbers over a set time period with a clear denominator, using consistent formats between outcomes and interventions to enable unbiased comparisons, and interpreting the numbers for the reader to meet the needs of varying numeracy. Discussion: Understanding how different numerical formats can bias risk perception will help decision aid developers communicate risks in a balanced, comprehensible manner and avoid accidental “nudging” toward a particular option. Decisions between probability formats need to consider the available evidence and user skills. The review may be useful for other areas of science communication in which unbiased presentation of probabilities is important.
KW - decision aids
KW - risk communication
KW - standards
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102147287&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0272989X21996328
DO - 10.1177/0272989X21996328
M3 - Review article
C2 - 33660551
AN - SCOPUS:85102147287
SN - 0272-989X
VL - 41
SP - 821
EP - 833
JO - Medical Decision Making
JF - Medical Decision Making
IS - 7
ER -