The right tool is what they need, not what we have: a taxonomy of appropriate levels of precision in patient risk communication
- PMID: 22955699
- DOI: 10.1177/1077558712458541
The right tool is what they need, not what we have: a taxonomy of appropriate levels of precision in patient risk communication
Abstract
While patients often receive risk information, exactly what constitutes being "informed" about health risks is often unclear. Patients have specific needs, such as avoiding being surprised by a possible outcome and making complex risk trade-off decisions. Yet all risk information is not equally informative for those needs. In this article, I present a taxonomy of seven risk concepts that vary in their inherent precision and evaluability. Congruent with the "less is more" concept, I argue that risk communications should use formats that are tailored to message recipients' specific informational needs. Simpler formats can be used when patients only need to order risks, while more complex numerical probability statements will be necessary when patients need to assess differences in risk magnitude and put those differences into meaningful context. Selecting need-congruent formats when designing communications about risks to patients is a novel approach that may better support patients' health care decision making.
Similar articles
-
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003. PMID: 14698953 Review.
-
Women's views of optimal risk communication and decision making in general practice consultations about the menopause and hormone replacement therapy.Patient Educ Couns. 2004 May;53(2):121-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2003.11.001. Patient Educ Couns. 2004. PMID: 15140450
-
Primer: Demystifying risk--understanding and communicating medical risks.Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2007 Mar;3(3):181-7; quiz 1 p following 187. doi: 10.1038/ncprheum0397. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2007. PMID: 17334341 Review.
-
Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations.Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):696-713. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07307271. Epub 2007 Sep 14. Med Decis Making. 2007. PMID: 17873259 Review.
-
Probability information in risk communication: a review of the research literature.Risk Anal. 2009 Feb;29(2):267-87. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01137.x. Epub 2008 Nov 5. Risk Anal. 2009. PMID: 19000070 Review.
Cited by
-
"R" you getting this? Factors contributing to the public's understanding, evaluation, and use of basic reproduction numbers for infectious diseases.BMC Public Health. 2024 May 1;24(1):1209. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18669-6. BMC Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38693508 Free PMC article.
-
Supporting Patient-Centered Pregnancy Counseling in Nephrology Care: A Semistructured Interview Study of Patients and Nephrologists.Kidney Int Rep. 2023 Aug 19;8(11):2235-2242. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2023.08.010. eCollection 2023 Nov. Kidney Int Rep. 2023. PMID: 38025233 Free PMC article.
-
Strategies for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and the population: a scoping review.Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jul 10;21(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01017-2. Health Res Policy Syst. 2023. PMID: 37430348 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A Taxonomy of Non-honesty in Public Health Communication.Public Health Ethics. 2023 Mar 23;16(1):86-101. doi: 10.1093/phe/phad003. eCollection 2023 Apr. Public Health Ethics. 2023. PMID: 37151785 Free PMC article.
-
Patients' and Members of the Public's Wishes Regarding Transparency in the Context of Secondary Use of Health Data: Scoping Review.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Apr 13;25:e45002. doi: 10.2196/45002. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37052967 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
