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 Armstrong, K.
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Armstrong, K.
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
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?

Effect of Framing as Gain versus Loss on Understanding and Hypothetical Treatment Choices: Survival and Mortality Curves

Katrina Armstrong, MD, MSc

Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center

J. Sanford Schwartz, MD

Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center

Genevieve Fitzgerald, BA

Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Mary Putt, ScD

Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center

Peter A. Ubel, MD

Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center

Background. Presentation of information using survival or mortality (i.e., incidence) curves offers a potentially powerful method of communication because such curves provide information about risk over time in a relatively simple graphic format. However, the effect of framing as survival versus mortality on understanding and treatment choice is not known.Methods. In this study, 451 individuals awaiting jury duty at the Philadelphia City Courthouse were randomized to receive 1 of 3 questionnaires: (1) survival curves, (2) mortality curves, or (3) both survival and mortality curves. Each questionnaire included a brief description of a hypothetical treatment decision, survival curve graphs and/or mortality curve graphs presenting the outcome of the treatment, and questions measuring understanding of the information contained in the graphs and preference for undergoing treatment. After completing a brief practice exercise, participants were asked to answer questions assessing their ability to interpret single points on a curve and the difference between curves, and then to decide whether they would choose to undergo preventive surgery for 3 different scenarios in which the benefit of surgery varied. Results. Participants who received only survival curves or who received both survival and mortality curves were significantly more accurate in answering questions about the information than participants who received only mortality curves (P < 0.05). For 2 of the 3 treatment presentations, participants who received only mortality curves were significantly less likely to prefer preventive surgery than participants who received survival curves only or both survival and mortality curves (P < 0.05). The effect of framing on understanding was greatest among participants with less than a college education and among non-Caucasian participants.Conclusion. Framing graphic risk information as chance of death over time results in lower levels of understanding and less interest in preventive surgery than framing as chance of survival over time.

Key Words: Decision making • framing effect • risk communication

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 22, No. 1, 76-83 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0202200108


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
AJPHHome page
G. Siegal, N. Siegal, and R. J. Bonnie
An Account of Collective Actions in Public Health
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2009; 99(9): 1583 - 1587.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
L.-W. Chao, J. A. Pagan, and B. J. Soldo
End-of-Life Medical Treatment Choices: Do Survival Chances and Out-of-Pocket Costs Matter?
Med Decis Making, July 1, 2008; 28(4): 511 - 523.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
PediatricsHome page
M. F. Haward, R. O. Murphy, and J. M. Lorenz
Message Framing and Perinatal Decisions
Pediatrics, July 1, 2008; 122(1): 109 - 118.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
J. S. Ancker and D. Kaufman
Rethinking Health Numeracy: A Multidisciplinary Literature Review
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., November 1, 2007; 14(6): 713 - 721.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
B. J. Zikmund-Fisher, D. M. Smith, P. A. Ubel, and A. Fagerlin
Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: Effects of Low Numeracy on Comprehension of Risk Communications and Utility Elicitations
Med Decis Making, October 1, 2007; 27(5): 663 - 671.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
J. S. Ancker, Y. Senathirajah, R. Kukafka, and J. B. Starren
Design Features of Graphs in Health Risk Communication: A Systematic Review
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., November 1, 2006; 13(6): 608 - 618.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
K. Armstrong, B. Weber, P. A. Ubel, N. Peters, J. Holmes, and J. S. Schwartz
Individualized Survival Curves Improve Satisfaction With Cancer Risk Management Decisions in Women With BRCA1/2 Mutations
J. Clin. Oncol., December 20, 2005; 23(36): 9319 - 9328.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
G C. Alexander, R. M. Werner, A. Fagerlin, and P. A. Ubel
Support for Physician Deception of Insurance Companies among a Sample of Philadelphia Residents
Ann Intern Med, March 18, 2003; 138(6): 472 - 475.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]