Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine 3/2008

01-06-2008 | Original Article

Clinical Implications of Numeracy: Theory and Practice

Authors: Wendy Nelson, Ph.D., Valerie F. Reyna, Ph.D., Angela Fagerlin, Ph.D., Isaac Lipkus, Ph.D., Ellen Peters, Ph.D.

Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Low numeracy is pervasive and constrains informed patient choice, reduces medication compliance, limits access to treatments, impairs risk communication, and affects medical outcomes; therefore, it is incumbent upon providers to minimize its adverse effects.

Purpose

We provide an overview of research on health numeracy and discuss its implications in clinical contexts.

Conclusions

Low numeracy cannot be reliably inferred on the basis of patients’ education, intelligence, or other observable characteristics. Objective and subjective assessments of numeracy are available in short forms and could be used to tailor health communication. Low scorers on these assessments are subject to cognitive biases, irrelevant cues (e.g., mood), and sharper temporal discounting. Because prevention of the leading causes of death (e.g., cancer and cardiovascular disease) depends on taking action now to prevent serious consequences later, those low in numeracy are likely to require more explanation of risk to engage in prevention behaviors. Visual displays can be used to make numerical relations more transparent, and different types of displays have different effects (e.g., greater risk avoidance). Ironically, superior quantitative processing seems to be achieved by focusing on qualitative gist and affective meaning, which has important implications for empowering patients to take advantage of the evidence in evidence-based medicine.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Kirsch I, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, Kolstad A. Adult literacy in America: A First Look at the Findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education; 1993. Kirsch I, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, Kolstad A. Adult literacy in America: A First Look at the Findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education; 1993.
3.
go back to reference Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education; 2006. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of Americas Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education; 2006.
4.
go back to reference US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010. With Understanding and Improving Health and Objectives for Improving Health. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office; 2000; 2 November. US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010. With Understanding and Improving Health and Objectives for Improving Health. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office; 2000; 2 November.
5.
go back to reference Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Health literacy: Report of the council on scientific affairs. J Am Med Assoc. 1999; 281: 552–557.CrossRef Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Health literacy: Report of the council on scientific affairs. J Am Med Assoc. 1999; 281: 552–557.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Nutbeam D. Health promotion glossary. Health Promot Int. 1998; 13: 349–364.CrossRef Nutbeam D. Health promotion glossary. Health Promot Int. 1998; 13: 349–364.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Golbeck AL, Ahlers-Schmidt CR, Paschal AM, Dismuke SE. A definition and operational framework for health numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 29: 375–376.PubMedCrossRef Golbeck AL, Ahlers-Schmidt CR, Paschal AM, Dismuke SE. A definition and operational framework for health numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 29: 375–376.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Ancker JS, Kaufman D. Rethinking health numeracy: A multidisciplinary literature review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007; 14: 713–721.PubMedCrossRef Ancker JS, Kaufman D. Rethinking health numeracy: A multidisciplinary literature review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007; 14: 713–721.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: Numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learn Indiv Differ. 2007; 17: 147–159.CrossRef Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: Numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learn Indiv Differ. 2007; 17: 147–159.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Peters E, Vastfjall D, Slovic P, et al. Numeracy and decision making. Psychol Sci. 2006; 17: 408–414.CrossRef Peters E, Vastfjall D, Slovic P, et al. Numeracy and decision making. Psychol Sci. 2006; 17: 408–414.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Peters E, Dixon A, Tusler M. Consumer competencies and the use of comparative quality information: It isn’t just about literacy. Med Care Res Rev. 2007; 64: 379–394.PubMedCrossRef Hibbard JH, Peters E, Dixon A, Tusler M. Consumer competencies and the use of comparative quality information: It isn’t just about literacy. Med Care Res Rev. 2007; 64: 379–394.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kutner M, Greenberg E, Baer J. A First Look at the Literacy of America’s Adults in the 21st Century (NCES 2006-470). US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office; 2005. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Baer J. A First Look at the Literacy of Americas Adults in the 21st Century (NCES 2006-470). US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office; 2005.
13.
go back to reference Williams MV, Parker RM, Baker DW, et al. Inadequate functional health literacy among patients at two public hospitals. J Am Med Assoc. 1995; 274: 1677–1682.CrossRef Williams MV, Parker RM, Baker DW, et al. Inadequate functional health literacy among patients at two public hospitals. J Am Med Assoc. 1995; 274: 1677–1682.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rothman RL, Housam R, Weiss H, et al. Patient understanding of food labels: The role of literacy and numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31: 391–398.PubMedCrossRef Rothman RL, Housam R, Weiss H, et al. Patient understanding of food labels: The role of literacy and numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31: 391–398.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Davis TC, Crouch MA, Long SW, et al. Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients. Fam Med. 1991; 23: 433–435.PubMed Davis TC, Crouch MA, Long SW, et al. Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients. Fam Med. 1991; 23: 433–435.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Wilkinson G. WRAT-3: Wide Range Achievement Test, Administration Manual. Wilmington: Wide Range; 1993. Wilkinson G. WRAT-3: Wide Range Achievement Test, Administration Manual. Wilmington: Wide Range; 1993.
17.
go back to reference Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127: 966–972.PubMed Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127: 966–972.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Sheridan SL, Pignone MP, Lewis CL. A randomized comparison of patients’ understanding of number needed to treat and other common risk reduction formats. J Gen Intern Med. 2003; 18: 884–892.PubMedCrossRef Sheridan SL, Pignone MP, Lewis CL. A randomized comparison of patients’ understanding of number needed to treat and other common risk reduction formats. J Gen Intern Med. 2003; 18: 884–892.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Forrow L, Taylor WC, Arnold RM. Absolutely relative: How research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions. Am J Med. 1992; 92: 121–124.PubMedCrossRef Forrow L, Taylor WC, Arnold RM. Absolutely relative: How research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions. Am J Med. 1992; 92: 121–124.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Sheridan SL, Pignone M. Numeracy and the medical students’ ability to interpret data. Eff Clin Pract. 2002; 5: 35–40.PubMed Sheridan SL, Pignone M. Numeracy and the medical students’ ability to interpret data. Eff Clin Pract. 2002; 5: 35–40.PubMed
21.
go back to reference Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 37–44.CrossRef Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 37–44.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Yamigishi K. When a 12.86% mortality is more dangerous than 24.14%: Implications for risk communication. Appl Cogn Psychol. 1997; 11: 495–506.CrossRef Yamigishi K. When a 12.86% mortality is more dangerous than 24.14%: Implications for risk communication. Appl Cogn Psychol. 1997; 11: 495–506.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ, Whalen P. Genetic testing and medical decision making. Arch Intern Med. 2001; 161: 2406–2408.PubMedCrossRef Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ, Whalen P. Genetic testing and medical decision making. Arch Intern Med. 2001; 161: 2406–2408.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, Wahrenberger JW, Ross JM. The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. J Gen Intern Med. 1993; 8: 543–548.PubMedCrossRef Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, Wahrenberger JW, Ross JM. The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. J Gen Intern Med. 1993; 8: 543–548.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Chao C, Studts JL, Abell T, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: How presentation of recurrence risk influences decision making. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 4299–4305.PubMedCrossRef Chao C, Studts JL, Abell T, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: How presentation of recurrence risk influences decision making. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 4299–4305.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Naylor CD, Chen E, Strauss B. Measured enthusiasm: Does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness. Ann Intern Med. 1992; 117: 916–921.PubMed Naylor CD, Chen E, Strauss B. Measured enthusiasm: Does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness. Ann Intern Med. 1992; 117: 916–921.PubMed
27.
go back to reference Edwards A, Elwyn G, Covey J, Matthews E, Pill R. Presenting risk information: A review of the effects of “framing” and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun. 2001; 6: 61–682.PubMedCrossRef Edwards A, Elwyn G, Covey J, Matthews E, Pill R. Presenting risk information: A review of the effects of “framing” and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun. 2001; 6: 61–682.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Bucher HC, Weinbacher M, Gyr K. Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration. Br Med J. 1994; 309: 761–764. Bucher HC, Weinbacher M, Gyr K. Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration. Br Med J. 1994; 309: 761–764.
29.
go back to reference Hux JE, Naylor CD. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: Does the format of efficacy data determine patients’ acceptance of treatment? Med Decis Mak. 1995; 15: 152–157.CrossRef Hux JE, Naylor CD. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: Does the format of efficacy data determine patients’ acceptance of treatment? Med Decis Mak. 1995; 15: 152–157.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Sarfati D, Howden-Chapman P, Woodward A, Salmond C. Does the frame affect the picture? A study into how attitudes to screening for cancer are affected by the way benefits are expressed. J Med Screen. 1998; 5: 137–140.PubMed Sarfati D, Howden-Chapman P, Woodward A, Salmond C. Does the frame affect the picture? A study into how attitudes to screening for cancer are affected by the way benefits are expressed. J Med Screen. 1998; 5: 137–140.PubMed
31.
go back to reference DeWalt DA, Berkman ND, Sheridan S, Lohr KN, Pignone MP. Literacy and health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med. 2004; 19: 1228–1239.PubMedCrossRef DeWalt DA, Berkman ND, Sheridan S, Lohr KN, Pignone MP. Literacy and health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med. 2004; 19: 1228–1239.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Berkman ND, DeWalt DA, Pignone MP, et al. Literacy and Health Outcomes. Summary, Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 87. Rockville: AHRQ; 2004. (Prepared by RTI International, University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0016) AHRQ Publication No. 04-E007-1: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; January. Berkman ND, DeWalt DA, Pignone MP, et al. Literacy and Health Outcomes. Summary, Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 87. Rockville: AHRQ; 2004. (Prepared by RTI International, University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0016) AHRQ Publication No. 04-E007-1: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; January.
33.
go back to reference Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Clark WS, Nurss J. The relationship of patient reading ability to self-reported health and use of health services. Am J Pub Health. 1997; 87: 1027–1030.PubMed Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Clark WS, Nurss J. The relationship of patient reading ability to self-reported health and use of health services. Am J Pub Health. 1997; 87: 1027–1030.PubMed
34.
go back to reference Sentell TL, Halpin HA. Importance of adult literacy in understanding health disparities. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21: 862–866.PubMedCrossRef Sentell TL, Halpin HA. Importance of adult literacy in understanding health disparities. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21: 862–866.PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Williams MV, Baker DW, Parker RM, Nurss JR. Relationship of functional health literacy to patients’ knowledge of their chronic disease. Arch Intern Med. 1998; 158: 166–172.PubMedCrossRef Williams MV, Baker DW, Parker RM, Nurss JR. Relationship of functional health literacy to patients’ knowledge of their chronic disease. Arch Intern Med. 1998; 158: 166–172.PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Parker RM, Baker DW, Williams MV, Nurss JR. The test of functional health literacy in adults. J Gen Intern Med. 1995; 10: 537–541.PubMedCrossRef Parker RM, Baker DW, Williams MV, Nurss JR. The test of functional health literacy in adults. J Gen Intern Med. 1995; 10: 537–541.PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nurss J. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999; 38: 33–42.PubMedCrossRef Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nurss J. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999; 38: 33–42.PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Clark WS. Health literacy and the risk of hospital admission. J Gen Intern Med. 1998; 13: 791–798.PubMedCrossRef Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Clark WS. Health literacy and the risk of hospital admission. J Gen Intern Med. 1998; 13: 791–798.PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Scott TL, Gazmararian JA, Williams MV, Baker DW. Health literacy and preventive health care use among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. Medical Care. 2002; 40: 395–404.PubMedCrossRef Scott TL, Gazmararian JA, Williams MV, Baker DW. Health literacy and preventive health care use among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. Medical Care. 2002; 40: 395–404.PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Estrada CA, Martin-Hryniewicz M, Peek BT, Collins C, Byrd JC. Literacy and numeracy skills and anticoagulation control. Am J Med Sci. 2004; 328: 88–93.PubMedCrossRef Estrada CA, Martin-Hryniewicz M, Peek BT, Collins C, Byrd JC. Literacy and numeracy skills and anticoagulation control. Am J Med Sci. 2004; 328: 88–93.PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Apter AJ, Cheng J, Small D, et al. Asthma numeracy skill and health literacy. J Asthma. 2006; 43: 705–710.PubMedCrossRef Apter AJ, Cheng J, Small D, et al. Asthma numeracy skill and health literacy. J Asthma. 2006; 43: 705–710.PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Gazmararian JA, Kripalani S, Miller MJ, et al. Factors associated with medication refill adherence in cardiovascular-related diseases. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21: 1215–1221.PubMedCrossRef Gazmararian JA, Kripalani S, Miller MJ, et al. Factors associated with medication refill adherence in cardiovascular-related diseases. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21: 1215–1221.PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Lenert LA, Sherbourne CD, Reyna VF. Utility elicitation using single item questions compared with a computerized interview. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 97–104.CrossRef Lenert LA, Sherbourne CD, Reyna VF. Utility elicitation using single item questions compared with a computerized interview. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 97–104.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Morimoto T, Fukui T. Utilities measured by rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble: Review and reference for health care professionals. J Epidemiol. 2002; 12: 160–178.PubMed Morimoto T, Fukui T. Utilities measured by rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble: Review and reference for health care professionals. J Epidemiol. 2002; 12: 160–178.PubMed
45.
go back to reference Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Moncur M, Gabriel S, Tosteson ANA. Assessing values for health: Numeracy matters. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 382–390.CrossRef Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Moncur M, Gabriel S, Tosteson ANA. Assessing values for health: Numeracy matters. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 382–390.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Schwartz SR, McDowell J, Yueh B. Numeracy and the shortcomings of utility assessment in head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck. 2004; 26: 401–407.PubMedCrossRef Schwartz SR, McDowell J, Yueh B. Numeracy and the shortcomings of utility assessment in head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck. 2004; 26: 401–407.PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Lindau ST, Tomori C, Lyons T, et al. The association of health literacy with cervical cancer prevention knowledge and health behaviors in a multiethnic cohort of women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186: 938–943.PubMedCrossRef Lindau ST, Tomori C, Lyons T, et al. The association of health literacy with cervical cancer prevention knowledge and health behaviors in a multiethnic cohort of women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186: 938–943.PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Bass PF, Wilson JF, Griffith CH, Barnett DR. Residents’ ability to identify patients with poor literacy skills. Acad Med. 2002; 77: 1039–1041.PubMedCrossRef Bass PF, Wilson JF, Griffith CH, Barnett DR. Residents’ ability to identify patients with poor literacy skills. Acad Med. 2002; 77: 1039–1041.PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Rogers ES, Wallace LS, Weiss BD. Misperceptions of medical understanding in low-literacy patients: Implications for cancer prevention. Cancer Control. 2006; 3: 225–229. Rogers ES, Wallace LS, Weiss BD. Misperceptions of medical understanding in low-literacy patients: Implications for cancer prevention. Cancer Control. 2006; 3: 225–229.
50.
go back to reference Doak LG, Doak CC. Patient comprehension profiles: Recent findings and strategies. Patient Couns Health Educ. 1980; 2: 101–106.PubMedCrossRef Doak LG, Doak CC. Patient comprehension profiles: Recent findings and strategies. Patient Couns Health Educ. 1980; 2: 101–106.PubMedCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Kicklighter JR, Stein MA. Factors influencing diabetic clients’ ability to read and comprehend printed diabetic diet material. Diabetes Educ. 1993; 19: 40–46.PubMed Kicklighter JR, Stein MA. Factors influencing diabetic clients’ ability to read and comprehend printed diabetic diet material. Diabetes Educ. 1993; 19: 40–46.PubMed
52.
go back to reference Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Family Pract. 1990; 31: 533–538. Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Family Pract. 1990; 31: 533–538.
53.
go back to reference Powers RD. Emergency department patient literacy and the readability of patient-directed materials. Ann Emerg Med. 1988; 17: 124–126.PubMedCrossRef Powers RD. Emergency department patient literacy and the readability of patient-directed materials. Ann Emerg Med. 1988; 17: 124–126.PubMedCrossRef
54.
go back to reference Safeer RS, Keenan J. Health literacy: The gap between physicians and patients. Am Fam Phys. 2005; 72: 463–468. Safeer RS, Keenan J. Health literacy: The gap between physicians and patients. Am Fam Phys. 2005; 72: 463–468.
55.
go back to reference Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM. Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2004; 5: 69–106.CrossRef Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM. Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2004; 5: 69–106.CrossRef
56.
go back to reference Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Can patients interpret health information? An assessment of the medical data interpretation test. Med Decis Mak. 2005; 25: 290–300.CrossRef Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Can patients interpret health information? An assessment of the medical data interpretation test. Med Decis Mak. 2005; 25: 290–300.CrossRef
57.
go back to reference Weiss BD, Mays MZ, Martz W, et al. Quick assessment of literacy primary care: The newest vital sign. Ann Fam Med. 2005; 3: 514–522.PubMedCrossRef Weiss BD, Mays MZ, Martz W, et al. Quick assessment of literacy primary care: The newest vital sign. Ann Fam Med. 2005; 3: 514–522.PubMedCrossRef
58.
go back to reference Estrada C, Barnes V, Collins C, Byrd JC. Health literacy and numeracy. J Am Med Assoc. 1999; 282: 527.CrossRef Estrada C, Barnes V, Collins C, Byrd JC. Health literacy and numeracy. J Am Med Assoc. 1999; 282: 527.CrossRef
59.
go back to reference Montori VM, Leung TW, Thompson CA, et al. Validation of a diabetes numeracy evaluation tool [Abstract]. Diabetes. 2004; 53(Suppl 2): A224–A225. Montori VM, Leung TW, Thompson CA, et al. Validation of a diabetes numeracy evaluation tool [Abstract]. Diabetes. 2004; 53(Suppl 2): A224–A225.
60.
go back to reference Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA, et al. Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 672–680.CrossRef Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA, et al. Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 672–680.CrossRef
61.
go back to reference Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Smith DM, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Validation of the subjective numeracy scale: Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 663–671.CrossRef Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Smith DM, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Validation of the subjective numeracy scale: Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 663–671.CrossRef
62.
go back to reference Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. Patients and medical statistics: Interest, confidence, and ability. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20: 996–1000.PubMedCrossRef Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. Patients and medical statistics: Interest, confidence, and ability. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20: 996–1000.PubMedCrossRef
63.
go back to reference Feldman-Stewart D, Kocovski N, McConnell BA, et al. Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions. Med Decis Mak. 2000; 20: 228–238.CrossRef Feldman-Stewart D, Kocovski N, McConnell BA, et al. Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions. Med Decis Mak. 2000; 20: 228–238.CrossRef
64.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Merz JF. How the manner of presentation of data influences older patients in determining their treatment preferences. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993; 41: 223–228.PubMed Mazur DJ, Merz JF. How the manner of presentation of data influences older patients in determining their treatment preferences. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993; 41: 223–228.PubMed
65.
go back to reference Ancker J, Senathirajah Y, Kukafka R, Starren J. Design features of graphs in health risk communication: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006; 13: 608–618.PubMedCrossRef Ancker J, Senathirajah Y, Kukafka R, Starren J. Design features of graphs in health risk communication: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006; 13: 608–618.PubMedCrossRef
66.
go back to reference Lipkus IM, Hollands JG. The visual communication of risk. J Natl Cancer Inst Monograph. 1999; 25: 149–163. Lipkus IM, Hollands JG. The visual communication of risk. J Natl Cancer Inst Monograph. 1999; 25: 149–163.
67.
go back to reference Cleveland W, McGill R. Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. J Am Stat Assoc. 1984; 77: 541–547.CrossRef Cleveland W, McGill R. Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. J Am Stat Assoc. 1984; 77: 541–547.CrossRef
68.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Numeracy, ratio bias and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability. Learn Individ Differ (in press, 2008). Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Numeracy, ratio bias and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability. Learn Individ Differ (in press, 2008).
69.
go back to reference Reyna V, Brainerd C. Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learn Individ Differ. 1995; 7: 1–75.CrossRef Reyna V, Brainerd C. Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learn Individ Differ. 1995; 7: 1–75.CrossRef
70.
go back to reference Reyna VF. A theory of medical decision making and health: Fuzzy-trace theory. Med Decis Mak. (in press, 2008). Reyna VF. A theory of medical decision making and health: Fuzzy-trace theory. Med Decis Mak. (in press, 2008).
71.
go back to reference Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Zotov V. Further insight into the perception of quantitative information: Judgments of gist in treatment decisions. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 34–43.CrossRef Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Zotov V. Further insight into the perception of quantitative information: Judgments of gist in treatment decisions. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 34–43.CrossRef
72.
go back to reference Hollands JG, Tanaka T, Dyre BP. Understanding bias in proportion production. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002; 28: 563–574.PubMedCrossRef Hollands JG, Tanaka T, Dyre BP. Understanding bias in proportion production. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002; 28: 563–574.PubMedCrossRef
73.
go back to reference Sandman P, Weinstein N, Miller P. High risk or low: How location on a “risk ladder” affected perceived risk. Risk Anal. 1994; 14: 35–45.PubMedCrossRef Sandman P, Weinstein N, Miller P. High risk or low: How location on a “risk ladder” affected perceived risk. Risk Anal. 1994; 14: 35–45.PubMedCrossRef
74.
go back to reference Lakoff G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987. Lakoff G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.
75.
go back to reference Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. What’s time got to do with it? Inattention to duration in interpretation of survival graphs. Risk Anal. 2005; 25: 1–7.CrossRef Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. What’s time got to do with it? Inattention to duration in interpretation of survival graphs. Risk Anal. 2005; 25: 1–7.CrossRef
76.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. The origins of probability judgment: A review of data and theories. In: Wright G, Ayton P, eds. Subjective Probability. New York: Wiley; 1994: 239–272. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. The origins of probability judgment: A review of data and theories. In: Wright G, Ayton P, eds. Subjective Probability. New York: Wiley; 1994: 239–272.
77.
go back to reference Stone E, Yates J, Parker A. Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1997; 3: 243–256.CrossRef Stone E, Yates J, Parker A. Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1997; 3: 243–256.CrossRef
78.
go back to reference Stone E, Sieck W, Bull B, et al. Foreground: Background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 2003; 90: 19–36.CrossRef Stone E, Sieck W, Bull B, et al. Foreground: Background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 2003; 90: 19–36.CrossRef
79.
go back to reference Schapira MM, Nattinger AB, McHorney CA. Frequency or probability? A qualitative study of risk communication formats used in health care. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 459–467.CrossRef Schapira MM, Nattinger AB, McHorney CA. Frequency or probability? A qualitative study of risk communication formats used in health care. Med Decis Mak. 2001; 21: 459–467.CrossRef
80.
go back to reference Zacks J, Levy E, Tversky B, Schiano D. Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1998; 4: 119–138.CrossRef Zacks J, Levy E, Tversky B, Schiano D. Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1998; 4: 119–138.CrossRef
81.
go back to reference Levy E, Zacks J, Tversky B, Schiano D. Gratuitous graphics? Putting preferences in perspective. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vancouver: ACM; 1996: 42–49. Levy E, Zacks J, Tversky B, Schiano D. Gratuitous graphics? Putting preferences in perspective. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vancouver: ACM; 1996: 42–49.
82.
go back to reference Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher B, Ubel P, Smith D. Measuring numeracy and the impact of numeracy on medical decision making. Annual Meeting of the Society of Behavioral Medicine. Washington, DC; 2007. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher B, Ubel P, Smith D. Measuring numeracy and the impact of numeracy on medical decision making. Annual Meeting of the Society of Behavioral Medicine. Washington, DC; 2007.
83.
go back to reference Peters E, Dieckmann N, Dixon A, Hibbard JH, Mertz CK. Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Med Care Res Rev. 2007; 64: 169–190.PubMedCrossRef Peters E, Dieckmann N, Dixon A, Hibbard JH, Mertz CK. Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Med Care Res Rev. 2007; 64: 169–190.PubMedCrossRef
84.
go back to reference Bastardi A, Shafir E. On the pursuit and misuse of useless information. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998; 75: 19–32.PubMedCrossRef Bastardi A, Shafir E. On the pursuit and misuse of useless information. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998; 75: 19–32.PubMedCrossRef
85.
go back to reference McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med. 1982; 306: 1259–1262.PubMed McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med. 1982; 306: 1259–1262.PubMed
86.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. J Behav Decis Mak. 1991; 4: 249–262.CrossRef Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. J Behav Decis Mak. 1991; 4: 249–262.CrossRef
88.
go back to reference Frederick S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. J Econ Perspect. 2005; 19: 24–42. Frederick S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. J Econ Perspect. 2005; 19: 24–42.
89.
go back to reference Ashcraft MH. Math anxiety: Personal, educational, and cognitive consequences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2002; 11: 181–185.CrossRef Ashcraft MH. Math anxiety: Personal, educational, and cognitive consequences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2002; 11: 181–185.CrossRef
90.
go back to reference Fischhoff B. Assessing adolescent decision-making competence. Dev Rev (in press, 2008). Fischhoff B. Assessing adolescent decision-making competence. Dev Rev (in press, 2008).
91.
go back to reference Gigerenzer G. Why the distinction between single-event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa). In: Wright G, Ayton P, eds. Subjective Probability. New York, NY: Wiley; 1994: 129–161. Gigerenzer G. Why the distinction between single-event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa). In: Wright G, Ayton P, eds. Subjective Probability. New York, NY: Wiley; 1994: 129–161.
92.
go back to reference Dehaene S. The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997. Dehaene S. The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.
93.
go back to reference Natter HM, Berry DC. Effects of active information processing on the understanding of risk information. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2005; 19: 123–135.CrossRef Natter HM, Berry DC. Effects of active information processing on the understanding of risk information. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2005; 19: 123–135.CrossRef
94.
go back to reference Chen MK, Lakshminaryanan V, Santos LR. The evolution of our preferences: Evidence from capuchin monkey trading behavior. J Polit Econ. 2006; 114: 517–537.CrossRef Chen MK, Lakshminaryanan V, Santos LR. The evolution of our preferences: Evidence from capuchin monkey trading behavior. J Polit Econ. 2006; 114: 517–537.CrossRef
95.
go back to reference Barbey AK, Sloman SA. Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behav Brain Sci. 2007; 30: 241–254.PubMed Barbey AK, Sloman SA. Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behav Brain Sci. 2007; 30: 241–254.PubMed
96.
go back to reference Sloman S. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychol Bull. 1996; 119: 3–22.CrossRef Sloman S. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychol Bull. 1996; 119: 3–22.CrossRef
97.
go back to reference Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994; 49: 709–724.PubMedCrossRef Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994; 49: 709–724.PubMedCrossRef
98.
go back to reference Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal. 2004; 24: 311–322.PubMedCrossRef Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal. 2004; 24: 311–322.PubMedCrossRef
99.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Mills BA. Converging evidence supports fuzzy-trace theory’s nested sets hypothesis (but not the frequency hypothesis). Behav Brain Sci. 2007; 30: 278–280.CrossRef Reyna VF, Mills BA. Converging evidence supports fuzzy-trace theory’s nested sets hypothesis (but not the frequency hypothesis). Behav Brain Sci. 2007; 30: 278–280.CrossRef
100.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Ellis SC. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children’s risky decision making. Psychol Sci. 1994; 5: 275–279.CrossRef Reyna VF, Ellis SC. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children’s risky decision making. Psychol Sci. 1994; 5: 275–279.CrossRef
101.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Farley F. Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: Implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2006; 7: 1–44.CrossRef Reyna VF, Farley F. Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: Implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2006; 7: 1–44.CrossRef
102.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ. Physician decision making and cardiac risk: Effects of knowledge, risk perception, risk tolerance, and fuzzy processing. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2006; 12: 179–195.PubMedCrossRef Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ. Physician decision making and cardiac risk: Effects of knowledge, risk perception, risk tolerance, and fuzzy processing. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2006; 12: 179–195.PubMedCrossRef
103.
go back to reference Reyna VF. Class inclusion, the conjunction fallacy, and other cognitive illusions. Dev Rev. 1991; 11: 317–336.CrossRef Reyna VF. Class inclusion, the conjunction fallacy, and other cognitive illusions. Dev Rev. 1991; 11: 317–336.CrossRef
104.
go back to reference Reyna VF, Adam MB. Fuzzy-trace theory, risk communication, and product labeling in sexually transmitted diseases. Risk Anal. 2003; 23: 325–342.PubMedCrossRef Reyna VF, Adam MB. Fuzzy-trace theory, risk communication, and product labeling in sexually transmitted diseases. Risk Anal. 2003; 23: 325–342.PubMedCrossRef
105.
go back to reference Rivers S, Mills B, Reyna VF. Risky behavior under the influence: A fuzzy-trace theory of emotion in adolescence. Dev Rev (in press, 2008). Rivers S, Mills B, Reyna VF. Risky behavior under the influence: A fuzzy-trace theory of emotion in adolescence. Dev Rev (in press, 2008).
106.
go back to reference Schapira M. The development of a health numeracy measure. Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects. Available at: http://crisp.cit.nih.gov. Accessibility verified December 13, 2007. Schapira M. The development of a health numeracy measure. Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects. Available at: http://​crisp.​cit.​nih.​gov. Accessibility verified December 13, 2007.
107.
go back to reference Donelle L, Hoffman-Goetz L, Arocha JF. Assessing health numeracy among community-dwelling older adults. J Health Commun. 2007; 12: 651–655.PubMedCrossRef Donelle L, Hoffman-Goetz L, Arocha JF. Assessing health numeracy among community-dwelling older adults. J Health Commun. 2007; 12: 651–655.PubMedCrossRef
108.
go back to reference Seligman HK, Wang FF, Palacios JL, et al. Physician notification of their diabetes patients’ limited health literacy: A randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20: 1001–1007.PubMedCrossRef Seligman HK, Wang FF, Palacios JL, et al. Physician notification of their diabetes patients’ limited health literacy: A randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20: 1001–1007.PubMedCrossRef
109.
go back to reference Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: Suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 696–713.CrossRef Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: Suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Mak. 2007; 27: 696–713.CrossRef
110.
go back to reference Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. Mortality versus survival graphs: Improving temporal consistence in perceptions of treatment effectiveness. Patient Educ Couns. 2007; 66: 100–107.PubMedCrossRef Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. Mortality versus survival graphs: Improving temporal consistence in perceptions of treatment effectiveness. Patient Educ Couns. 2007; 66: 100–107.PubMedCrossRef
111.
go back to reference Schapira MM, Nattinger AB, McAuliffe TL. The influence of graphic format on breast cancer risk communication. J Health Commun. 2006; 11: 569–582.PubMedCrossRef Schapira MM, Nattinger AB, McAuliffe TL. The influence of graphic format on breast cancer risk communication. J Health Commun. 2006; 11: 569–582.PubMedCrossRef
112.
go back to reference Stone ER, Yates JF, Parker AM. Risk communication: Absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks. Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 1994; 60: 387–408.CrossRef Stone ER, Yates JF, Parker AM. Risk communication: Absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks. Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 1994; 60: 387–408.CrossRef
113.
go back to reference Carpenter PA, Shah P. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1998; 4: 75–100.CrossRef Carpenter PA, Shah P. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1998; 4: 75–100.CrossRef
114.
go back to reference Cleveland WS, McGill R. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science. 1985; 229: 828–833.PubMedCrossRef Cleveland WS, McGill R. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science. 1985; 229: 828–833.PubMedCrossRef
115.
go back to reference Burkell J. What are the chances? Evaluating risk and benefit information in consumer health materials. J Med Lib Assoc. 2004; 92: 200–208. Burkell J. What are the chances? Evaluating risk and benefit information in consumer health materials. J Med Lib Assoc. 2004; 92: 200–208.
116.
go back to reference Wallsten TS, Budescu DV, Zwick R, Kemp SM. Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in verbal or numerical terms. Bull Psychon Soc. 1993; 31: 135–138. Wallsten TS, Budescu DV, Zwick R, Kemp SM. Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in verbal or numerical terms. Bull Psychon Soc. 1993; 31: 135–138.
117.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patient interpretations of terms connoting low probabilities when communicating about surgical risk. Theor Surg. 1993; 8: 143–145.PubMed Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patient interpretations of terms connoting low probabilities when communicating about surgical risk. Theor Surg. 1993; 8: 143–145.PubMed
118.
go back to reference Kenney RM. Between never and always. N Engl J Med. 1981; 305: 1097–1098.PubMed Kenney RM. Between never and always. N Engl J Med. 1981; 305: 1097–1098.PubMed
119.
go back to reference Bryant GD, Norman GR. Expressions of probability: Words and numbers. N Engl J Med. 1980; 302: 411–412.PubMed Bryant GD, Norman GR. Expressions of probability: Words and numbers. N Engl J Med. 1980; 302: 411–412.PubMed
120.
go back to reference Woloshin KK, Ruffin MT, Gorenflo DW. Patients’ interpretation of qualitative probability statements. Arch Fam Med. 1994; 3: 961–966.PubMedCrossRef Woloshin KK, Ruffin MT, Gorenflo DW. Patients’ interpretation of qualitative probability statements. Arch Fam Med. 1994; 3: 961–966.PubMedCrossRef
121.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Hickam DH, Mazur MD. How patients’ preferences for risk information influence treatment choice in a case of high risk and high therapeutic uncertainty: Asymptomatic localized prostate cancer. Med Decis Mak. 1999; 19: 394–398.CrossRef Mazur DJ, Hickam DH, Mazur MD. How patients’ preferences for risk information influence treatment choice in a case of high risk and high therapeutic uncertainty: Asymptomatic localized prostate cancer. Med Decis Mak. 1999; 19: 394–398.CrossRef
122.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ preferences for risk disclosure and role in decision making for invasive medical procedures. J Gen Intern Med. 1997; 12: 114–117.PubMedCrossRef Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ preferences for risk disclosure and role in decision making for invasive medical procedures. J Gen Intern Med. 1997; 12: 114–117.PubMedCrossRef
123.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ interpretations of probability terms. J Gen Intern Med. 1991; 6: 237–240.PubMedCrossRef Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ interpretations of probability terms. J Gen Intern Med. 1991; 6: 237–240.PubMedCrossRef
124.
go back to reference Brun W, Teigen KH. Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 1988; 41: 390–404.CrossRef Brun W, Teigen KH. Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Org Behav Hum Decis Process. 1988; 41: 390–404.CrossRef
125.
go back to reference O’Brien BJ. Words or numbers? The evaluation of probability expressions in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1989; 39: 98–100.PubMed O’Brien BJ. Words or numbers? The evaluation of probability expressions in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1989; 39: 98–100.PubMed
126.
go back to reference Kong A, Barnett GO, Mosteller F, Youtz C. How medical professionals evaluate expressions of probability. N Engl J Med. 1986; 315: 740–744.PubMed Kong A, Barnett GO, Mosteller F, Youtz C. How medical professionals evaluate expressions of probability. N Engl J Med. 1986; 315: 740–744.PubMed
127.
go back to reference Nakao MA, Axelrod S. Numbers are better than words: Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. Am J Med. 1983; 74: 1061–1065.PubMedCrossRef Nakao MA, Axelrod S. Numbers are better than words: Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. Am J Med. 1983; 74: 1061–1065.PubMedCrossRef
128.
go back to reference Mapes REA. Verbal and numerical estimates of probability in therapeutic contexts. Soc Sci Med. 1979; 13A: 277–282.PubMed Mapes REA. Verbal and numerical estimates of probability in therapeutic contexts. Soc Sci Med. 1979; 13A: 277–282.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical Implications of Numeracy: Theory and Practice
Authors
Wendy Nelson, Ph.D.
Valerie F. Reyna, Ph.D.
Angela Fagerlin, Ph.D.
Isaac Lipkus, Ph.D.
Ellen Peters, Ph.D.
Publication date
01-06-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0883-6612
Electronic ISSN: 1532-4796
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Annals of Behavioral Medicine 3/2008 Go to the issue