Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
Right arrow Articles by Baron, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
Right arrow Articles by Baron, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Inclusion of Patient Testimonials in Decision Aids

Effects on Treatment Choices

Peter A. Ubel, MD

Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Christopher Jepson, PhD

Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Jonathan Baron, PhD

Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania

Background. Decision aids often provide statistical information and patient testimonials to guide treatment choices. This raises the possibility that the testimonials will overwhelm the statistical information. Methods. Prospective jurors in Philadelphia County were presented with hypothetical statistical information about the percentage of angina patients who benefit from angioplasty and bypass surgery (50% and 75%, respectively). They were also given written testimonials from hypothetical patients who had benefited or not benefited from each of the two treatments. The numbers of patients benefiting and not benefiting were varied to be either proportionate to the statistical information or disproportionate. In study 1, all participants received 1 testimonial from a patient who had benefited from angioplasty and 1 from a patient who had not. Participants receiving the proportionate questionnaire version were also given 3 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass surgery and 1 from a patient who did not, coinciding with the hypothetical statistical information. In contrast, participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received only 1 testimonial from a patient who benefited from surgery and 1 from a patient who did not. In study 2, all participants received 2 examples of patients who benefited from angioplasty and 2 who did not. Participants with the proportionate questionnaire version received the same testimonials regarding surgery as in study 1. Those receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received 2 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass and 2 from patients who did not. Finally, a separate set of participants in study 2 received a questionnaire with no testimonials. Results. In study 1, 30% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 44% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P = 0.002 by X2). In study 2, 34% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 37% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P= 0.59 by X2). Of those receiving no patient testimonials, 58% chose bypass surgery. Conclusions. The inclusion of written patient testimonials significantly influenced hypothetical treatment choices. Efforts to make the mix of positive versus negative testimonials proportionate to statistical information may, under some circumstances, affect choices in ways that cannot automatically be assumed to be optimal.

Key Words: decision making • cognitive bias • decision aid • informed consent • vividness

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 21, No. 1, 60-68 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100108


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Mem CognitHome page
N. A. Obrecht, G. B. Chapman, and R. Gelman
An encounter frequency account of how experience affects likelihood estimation
Mem Cognit, July 1, 2009; 37(5): 632 - 643.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
J. H. Kerstholt, F. van der Zwaard, H. Bart, and A. Cremers
Construction of Health Preferences: A Comparison of Direct Value Assessment and Personal Narratives
Med Decis Making, July 1, 2009; 29(4): 513 - 520.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J Law Med EthicsHome page
J. Schulkin
Hormone Therapy, Dilemmas, Medical Decisions.
J. Law Med. Ethics, March 1, 2008; 36(1): 73 - 88.
[PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
N. F. Col, L. Ngo, J. M. Fortin, R. J. Goldberg, and A. M. O'Connor
Can Computerized Decision Support Help Patients Make Complex Treatment Decisions? A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Individualized Menopause Decision Aid
Med Decis Making, October 1, 2007; 27(5): 585 - 598.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
A. E. Barnato, H. A. Llewellyn-Thomas, E. M. Peters, L. Siminoff, E. D. Collins, and M. J. Barry
Communication and Decision Making in Cancer Care: Setting Research Priorities for Decision Support/Patients' Decision Aids
Med Decis Making, October 1, 2007; 27(5): 626 - 634.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
A. Fagerlin, C. Wang, and P. A. Ubel
Reducing the Influence of Anecdotal Reasoning on People's Health Care Decisions: Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Statistics?
Med Decis Making, July 1, 2005; 25(4): 398 - 405.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
D. P. Lorence, A. Spink, and R. Jameson
Information in Medical Decision Making: How Consistent Is Our Management?
Med Decis Making, December 1, 2002; 22(6): 514 - 521.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Health Informatics JournalHome page
D. P. Lorence, A. Spink, and R. Jameson
Variation in EPR clinical support systems: data, decisions and disparity
Health Informatics Journal, March 1, 2002; 8(1): 34 - 38.
[Abstract] [PDF]