Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to browse AJSM online!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0272989X07307271v1
0272989X07307271v2
27/5/696    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Lipkus, I. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lipkus, I. M.
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?

Article

Numeric, Verbal, and Visual Formats of Conveying Health Risks: Suggested Best Practices and Future Recommendations

Isaac M. Lipkus*

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: lipku001{at}mc.duke.edu.


  Abstract
Perception of health risk can affect medical decisions and health behavior change. Yet the concept of risk is a difficult one for the public to grasp. Whether perceptions of risk affect decisions and behaviors often relies on how messages of risk magnitudes (i.e., likelihood)are conveyed. Based on expert opinion, this article offers, when possible, best practices for conveying magnitude of health risks using numeric, verbal, and visual formats. This expert opinion is based on existing empirical evidence, review of papers and books, and consultations with experts in risk communication. This article also discusses formats to use pertaining to unique risk communication challenges (e.g., conveying small-probability events, interactions). Several recommendations are suggested for enhancing precision in perception of risk by presenting risk magnitudes numerically and visually. Overall, there are little data to suggest best practices for verbal communication of risk magnitudes. Across the 3 formats, few overall recommendations could be suggested because of 1) lack of consistency in testing formats using the same outcomes in the domain of interest, 2) lack of critical tests using randomized controlled studies pitting formats against one another, and 3) lack of theoretical progress detailing and testing mechanisms why one format should be more efficacious in a specific context to affect risk magnitudes than others. Areas of future research are provided that it is hoped will help illuminate future best practices. Key words: risk communication; methodology. (Med Decis Making 2007;XX:xx–xx)

First published on September 14, 2007, doi:10.1177/0272989X07307271

Medical Decision Making 2007;27:696.

A more recent version of this article appeared on October 1, 2007
 This version was published on September 26, 2007
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
 Health Educ BehavHome page
I. M. Lipkus and E. Peters
Understanding the Role of Numeracy in Health: Proposed Theoretical Framework and Practical Insights
Health Educ Behav, December 1, 2009; 36(6): 1065 - 1081.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
A. Fagerlin
Getting Down to Details in the Design and Use of Decision Aids
Med Decis Making, July 1, 2009; 29(4): 409 - 411.
[PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
K. Visvanathan, R. T. Chlebowski, P. Hurley, N. F. Col, M. Ropka, D. Collyar, M. Morrow, C. Runowicz, K. I. Pritchard, K. Hagerty, et al.
American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on the Use of Pharmacologic Interventions Including Tamoxifen, Raloxifene, and Aromatase Inhibition for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction
J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 2009; 27(19): 3235 - 3258.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
C. Keller and M. Siegrist
Effect of Risk Communication Formats on Risk Perception Depending on Numeracy
Med Decis Making, July 1, 2009; 29(4): 483 - 490.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
K. L. Kilbridge, G. Fraser, M. Krahn, E. M. Nelson, M. Conaway, R. Bashore, A. Wolf, M. J. Barry, D. A. Gong, R. F. Nease Jr, et al.
Lack of Comprehension of Common Prostate Cancer Terms in an Underserved Population
J. Clin. Oncol., April 20, 2009; 27(12): 2015 - 2021.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
J. Leal, A. M. Gray, and P. M. Clarke
Development of life-expectancy tables for people with type 2 diabetes
Eur. Heart J., April 1, 2009; 30(7): 834 - 839.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nicotine Tob ResHome page
J. B. McClure, E. Ludman, L. Grothaus, C. Pabiniak, J. Richards, and A. Mohelnitzky
Immediate and short-term impact of a brief motivational smoking intervention using a biomedical risk assessment: The Get PHIT trial
Nicotine Tob Res, April 1, 2009; 11(4): 394 - 403.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
M. J. Thun, L. M. Hannan, and M. Stefanek
Risky Business: Tools to Improve Risk Communication in a Doctor's Office
J Natl Cancer Inst, June 18, 2008; 100(12): 830 - 831.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
D. J. Spiegelhalter
Understanding Uncertainty
Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2008; 6(3): 196 - 197.
[Full Text] [PDF]