Both groups saw a computer based information tool on FMS, but only the SDM group was treated by doctors which underwent a special SDM communication training. They were either treated in an SDM group or in an information group.
#It takes two to tango meaning trial
Methods: Sixty-seven FMS patients of an outpatient university setting that had been included in a randomized controlled trial were followed up. We investigated the effects of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention on physician-patient interaction and health outcome. What does the public know about the benefit of screening?Ībstract Objective: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) patients and their doctors frequently complain on interaction difficulties. Note that neither study found a reduction in total mortality or all-cancer mortality. study) or a reduction of 0.7 in 1,000 in the European study. The two randomized trials available show either no reduction in prostate cancer-specific deaths (the U.S.
The fact box (Figure 1) shows the benefit and harms that men age 55 and older can expect when taking the test. Patients Screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests is often encouraged by physicians.
I provide one illustration for patients ’ and doctors ’ striking but largely unnoticed level of statistical illiteracy. STATISTICAL ILLITERACY IN HEALTH The classical doctor–patient relation is based on (the physician’s) paternalism and (the patient’s) trust in authority, which makes statistical literacy a nonissue the same holds for the traditional combination of determinism (physicians who seek causes, not probabilities) and the illusion of certainty (patients who seek certainty although there is none). I argue that statistical illiteracy (i) is common to patients, journalists, and physicians alike (ii) is created by nontransparent framing of information that is sometimes an unintentional result of lack of understanding, but can also be an intentional effort to manipulate or persuade people and (iii) is a consequence of the ongoing lack of efficient training in statistical thinking in the educational system. For instance, few are aware that higher survival rates with cancer screening do not imply longer life, or that the statement that mammography screening reduces the risk of dying from breast cancer by 20 % in fact means that 1 less woman out of 1,000 will die of breast cancer.
Collective statistical illiteracy is the phenomenon that the majority of people do not understand what health statistics mean, or even consistently draw wrong conclusions without noticing.
0 kommentar(er)
